Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #201

[Colinnew]

People just shoot guns for fun. I don’t know why a lot of folks don’t get that there doesn’t have to be an animal on the other end. I’ve shot thousands of rounds in the woods just for fun.

I personally think he did it but sadly this cartridge to anyone seasoned with guns from a rural area, is a nothingburger. A loose cartridge in a common caliber common brand, most common 40 caliber handgun in America. You didn’t photograph the tip and whole cartridge. No evidence marker. There’s better evidence in this case. I hope they drop it.

I respectfully disagree it’s a important piece of evidence for sure. Just my opinion

 

[katydid23]

I think I'm starting to see that by taking photos of that bullet being removed and also the markings on it (February 14th, 2017) would prove that that unspent bullet is the exact same one that everyone is going to see when it is shown as evidence in court.

JMT MOO JMO

But there are other methods , part of standard protocol, which can also prove it is the same bullet. We will hear that when COC staff testifies.

When the forensics team is collecting the evidence, they have a lot of things to track. Not just the bullet. They are responsible for a tremendous amount of things to do and they are not going to take EXTRA, NON PROTOCOL steps while in the process of doing their job.

The person who collected the bullet was not looking for marks upon th bullet so would not be focused upon that aspect. Those marks were discovered AT THE LAB. So the man at the crime scene had no idea he should take extra pictures of something he knew nothing about and couldn't even see. He is just trying not to ruin and potential DNA or fingerprint evidence. IMO

 

[Colinnew]

ummm no, but it is a handgun, which would be allowed to be carried while hunting and OP original question was if hunting was allowed in the area, and the answer is yes-

is allowed in the area, on private property- (and other places) with varying degrees of licensing and permitting and regulations around days, dates, times and bag limits -

I don’t think the S & W is a small game weapon (or at least not a practical normative one-)

I was speaking to hunting in the area and the right to carry handguns while hunting

It was found among two dead precious young girls so it is quite important. Yes Some people carry guns in the woods. Just my opinion

 

[katydid23]

People just shoot guns for fun. I don’t know why a lot of folks don’t get that there doesn’t have to be an animal on the other end. I’ve shot thousands of rounds in the woods just for fun.

I personally think he did it but sadly this cartridge to anyone seasoned with guns from a rural area, is a nothingburger. A loose cartridge in a common caliber common brand, most common 40 caliber handgun in America. You didn’t photograph the tip and whole cartridge. No evidence marker. There’s better evidence in this case. I hope they drop it.

Were there dozens of other UNSPENT cartridges in the area of the crime scene? Or even any others? Or any bullets that were shot in that area? I don't think there were any collected or even mentioned.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

People just shoot guns for fun. I don’t know why a lot of folks don’t get that there doesn’t have to be an animal on the other end. I’ve shot thousands of rounds in the woods just for fun.

I personally think he did it but sadly this cartridge to anyone seasoned with guns from a rural area, is a nothingburger. A loose cartridge in a common caliber common brand, most common 40 caliber handgun in America. You didn’t photograph the tip and whole cartridge. No evidence marker. There’s better evidence in this case. I hope they drop it.

This is what I was getting at- especially on private property- the appearance of the possibility of laxity in the investigation- as if there’s no logical reason why that bullet was on the property- people shot guns, a lot, for a lot of reasons, and carrying handguns are really common in many parts of the country- for a lot of reasons-

The oddest part is cycled through his gun, vs fired from his gun- an ejected bullet is rather strange in my opinion and experience-

But the original question was if hunting was allowed, yes- is this a typical hunting weapon or bullet, no- does any of this impact whether or not RA is guilty- no —

might it influence or impact the jury’s perception of the investigation or raise questions about chain of custody and or feed wild conspiracy theories- absolutely-

All moo

 

[Warwick7]

That doesn't exclude the fact that the pan didn't get extra dents over time thus making it not so unique

Or making it extremely unique.

 

[Colinnew]

This is what I was getting at- especially on private property- the appearance of the possibility of laxity in the investigation- as if there’s no logical reason why that bullet was on the property- people shot guns, a lot, for a lot of reasons, and carrying handguns are really common in many parts of the country- for a lot of reasons-

The oddest part is cycled through his gun, vs fired from his gun- an ejected bullet is rather strange in my opinion and experience-

But the original question was if hunting was allowed, yes- is this a typical hunting weapon or bullet, no- does any of this impact whether or not RA is guilty- no —

might it influence or impact the jury’s perception of the investigation or raise questions about chain of custody and or feed wild conspiracy theories- absolutely-

All moo

If this was some type of shooting range you might have something but I do not believe it is. If they positively tie it to Richard Allen’s gun then case closed. Just my opinion

 

[Simply Southern]

Exactly.

This is particularly frustrating.

Why not call the local grocery bagger to the stand and ask him to expound upon the finer points of forensic investigations? Why not call a house painter and ask him to explicate E=MC squared?

The D, IMO, is intentionally and nefariously calling experts in one area to testify in a discipline in which they have no training, just to elicit an “I don’t know” and hope the jury is confounded by that.

A solid defense is part of our law, but “tricks are for kids.”

IMO

ETA: I’m impressed with this jury. They seem to be paying very close attention and posing pertinent questions. I have hope they won’t be fooled by the “look over here, not over there” tactics of the defense.

I believe RA is guilty but I will accept this jury’s verdict, whatever it may be and whenever it is announced.

Moo…
P needs to do better witness preparation. These I don’t knows create doubt and confusing, lead to misunderstanding of the process.

A better approach is …
-not in my scope of expertises
-I’m not a part of that phase of the investigation
- not a part of my job function

Something besides, I don’t know.
Moo

 

[JAY CLUCK]

Were there dozens of other UNSPENT cartridges in the area of the crime scene? Or even any others? Or any bullets that were shot in that area? I don't think there were any collected or even mentioned.

lol do you mean casings? Or shot bullet lead?

No. I never said it wasn’t important. I never said it doesn’t have anything to do with this case. I think it does. I said why this is poor evidence that hurts PT to a jury in the hands of any competent DT

 

[Yemelyan]

This is from WISH TV's live trial blog about the testimony of ISP Lt. Brian Bunner:

Bunner explained the process of cell phone extraction to the court, which included retrieving the phone, manually examining and photographing the phone, extracting the data with tools by plugging it into a computer, putting data into a different software, then processing that data into a report.

Bunner said the report for Libby German’s phone was several hundred pages. After creating the report for Libby’s phone, he told the jury he handed it off to detectives. “(I) wanted to get that information off that phone and into the hands of the investigators,” he said.

Bunner said he looked through Libby’s camera roll and found the “bridge video.” He also mentioned the camera roll was the phone’s “last user activity.” The approximately 35-second video was taken between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. on Feb. 13, 2017.

Bunner told the court he took several screenshots of the video to send to detectives. State prosecutor Nick McLelland asked if in the pictures, could he see a man behind Abby.

“No,” Bunner said.

“In the following photos, can you?” McLelland asked.

“Yes,” Bunner replied.

Source: Delphi Murders trial: Day 4 live blog

This is the "see the trail ends here" video that they are discussing. Is this different from the "guys down the hill" video? Because he testified the man was not seen behind them in the screenshots of the video, but was seen in later images. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the reporting.

 

[Colinnew]

lol do you mean casings? Or shot bullet lead?

No. I never said it wasn’t important. I never said it doesn’t have anything to do with this case. I think it does. I said why this is poor evidence that hurts PT to a jury in the hands of any competent DT

I’m not following, a cartridge case at the murder scene from Richard Allen’s gun is poor evidence?

Just my opinion.

 

[Justice101]

It was found among two dead precious young girls so it is quite important. Yes Some people carry guns in the woods. Just my opinion

And shotguns and rifles are used in the woods. In general...Not handguns

 

[Web_Sleuth]

This is from WISH TV's live trial blog about the testimony of ISP Lt. Brian Bunner:

Bunner explained the process of cell phone extraction to the court, which included retrieving the phone, manually examining and photographing the phone, extracting the data with tools by plugging it into a computer, putting data into a different software, then processing that data into a report.

Bunner said the report for Libby German’s phone was several hundred pages. After creating the report for Libby’s phone, he told the jury he handed it off to detectives. “(I) wanted to get that information off that phone and into the hands of the investigators,” he said.

Bunner said he looked through Libby’s camera roll and found the “bridge video.” He also mentioned the camera roll was the phone’s “last user activity.” The approximately 35-second video was taken between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. on Feb. 13, 2017.

Bunner told the court he took several screenshots of the video to send to detectives. State prosecutor Nick McLelland asked if in the pictures, could he see a man behind Abby.

“No,” Bunner said.

“In the following photos, can you?” McLelland asked.

“Yes,” Bunner replied.

Source: Delphi Murders trial: Day 4 live blog

This is the "see the trail ends here" video that they are discussing. Is this different from the "guys down the hill" video? Because he testified the man was not seen behind them in the screenshots of the video, but was seen in later images. Or maybe I am misunderstanding the reporting.

A different report I read said that the video says “Guys down the hill” and a girls voice says the part about the path ending, we got to go down here. I’ll try to find it.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848779380765426110

 

[justtrish]

I would assume the paperwork would speak for itself and not be an issue. Why would he need witnesses to testify about it?

I thought they had to call the witness because the defense refused to enter stipulations.. like both sides agree to xyz.. if the defense won't agree, then they have to call witnesses to establish all this stuff.

 

[Yemelyan]

A different report I read said that the video says “Guys down the hill” and a girls voice says the part about the path ending, we got to go down there. I’ll try to find it.

I read this too. We may have to wait until end of day when reporters can sort out their notes more logically to hear the full story.

 

[iamshadow21]

Moo…
P needs to do better witness preparation. These I don’t knows create doubt and confusing, lead to misunderstanding of the process.

A better approach is …
-not in my scope of expertises
-I’m not a part of that phase of the investigation
- not a part of my job function

Something besides, I don’t know.
Moo

And a defense lawyer will defuse that with things like 'yes or no?' and imply the witness is refusing to answer the question.

Sometimes 'I don't know' is the safest thing a witness can say.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

From MS-Day 3:

48 min: the second witness, crime scene photographer Page said that the jeans Abby was wearing appeared wet to the knee when asked how wet they were.
[So it seems they did wade across the creek]

1 hr 6 min: when Datzman told Baldwin that if SA is suspected, they do not want to take core body temps at the crime scene because they do not want to puncture the skin/body and possibly disrupt any SA evidence.
[I hope the jury caught this gem. Explains why no temp was taken at cs]

1 hr 11: Luttrell asked Datzman if he had EVER videotaped someone picking up a piece of evidence and putting it in a container, and the witness said no.
[Thank You Luttrell]

1 hr 12 min: juror questions to Datzman1) would there be any reason that the bullet submitted in evidence be different from the bullet collected at the crime. Answer: no. 2) Is there a process by which the jury can be ensured they are seeing evidene that has not been tampered with. The witness then explained the chain of custody concept and process.

I LOVE these jury questions. They are really paying attention.

 

[Justice101]

Sorry if I missed it, but did any of the witness(es) state where the "down the hill" came in the video in comparison to the other comments the girls made?

Or does the audio analysis come later?

 

[Deleted member 296739]

I think that the bullet is important- very important- it was found at a brutal crime scene-

The bullet introduced as evidence, is consistent with a bullet that has been cycled through the accused weapon- that is also very important

The questions around when and how the bullet was collected, was retained, was tested (for markings), and was compared to a bullet cycling through the accused weapon are the places that I personally as a juror would have had questions- not being anything but a novice on IN law, chain of custody of evidence, and or the art and science of bullet markings I would want to know more details- which many people have graciously helped me personally understand-

Asking if hunting is allowed in the area is a good question and thinking about how else a bullet might have ended up where it was is also valid- I don’t think that means people lack critical thinking skills, wear tin hats, or eat conspiracy theories for breakfast

In the southeast where guns are very common and people getting framed isn’t in the ancient past, asking questions about the bullet, chain of custody, testing and timelines all seem logical in any given context … all my own opinions

 

[Melted]

Fortunately Allen went a long way in identifying himself as BG.

Three juvenile females passed a male dressed as BG. They said they could not make out his face, but described his clothing and his height.

Allen admitted to passing these females, and gave a similar description of his clothing.

This is really the only witness statement that matters, as both parties corroborate it (although Allen’s statement means a hell of a lot more).

There is no way these girls could positively identify a man whose face they could not see clearly.

And there in lies the problem.

You can’t convict someone based on what some witnesses recall they may have been wearing (which none of them even agreed upon, there were differing reports of what BG was wearing) this is where reasonable doubt comes in.

JMO