Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #202

[shonyakay]

“He said that though the rape kit showed no “overt injury patterns,” it does not mean that sexual contact didn’t occur.”

Misreported (?) in the Franks motion as “…were not sexually molested.” Innocent mistake? Did the doctor change his story as part of a conspiracy to frame an obscure pharmacy worker?

I think we should refer to it as the Farce memo from now on.

 

[tlcya]

The wounds being described as “incisions,” coupled by their length and depth, makes me think that not only was one weapon used, but that it was a box cutter.

certainly doesn't sound as if there was any wound described as coming from a serrated edge to me. So I will chuck the two bladed weapons, one with serrated edge, into the simply more lies and misstatements from the DT pile.

 

[ClearAhead]

The "bloody" man testimony is a mess.

So either this LE is so bad they didn't write down that a witness saw a BLOODY MAN in the same day and place two girls were murdered and then LOST the taped interview where she confirmed it or she did not say he was bloody and is misremembering.

It's almost certainly the latter IMO.

Eyewitness testimony is easily compromised and experts have generally agreed the first recollection immediately after the incident is the most reliable. The more time that goes by, the less reliable the memory is. Most likely this witness saw a muddy man, reported as much to LE, but as days, weeks, months, years go by and she learns details of the crime from the news she starts to think that maybe she actually saw blood as well and eventually has a false memory that was bloody. This is a common issue and has been the cause of many overturned guilty verdicts.

Regardless, it doesn't sound like we can believe the man she saw was bloody. I think she misremembered but even if she didn't then LE ruined that piece of evidence by being terrible at their jobs.

It doesn't matter much overall, it was hardly a smoking gun, but I'm concerned that so many people here seem to think her saying he was bloody on the stand 7 years somehow means he was in fact, bloody. Always, always be skeptical of eyewitness testimony especially if it's changed over time!

It puzzling how the P got her sighting right, but the D insisted she did not say bloody.

Richard Allen PCA source:

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

 

[WildHuncher]

That's not evidence though, my point was you could presume a motive but you have to prove that motive with evidence, and yes he may have in one of his numerous confessions stated that it was a motive,
But I have huge problems with his confessions, and anybody that has posted throughout trials with me over the years knows my opinion on the use of jail house snitches, and I think we may have some in this trial, testilying I call it when I see one

I don’t think they decided to start undressing themselves while being kidnapped. Not sure what you’re calling it but I see evidence.

 

[SouthEnd]

This is insane.

So bridge guy was with a group of stressed people at the mears lot?!?

That was misreported, other sources explained witness said - a group at the mears lot, and then, separately, sighting of the BG.

All MOO, I'd wait to see the end of day clarifications that will be surely posted by the press.

 

[JAY CLUCK]

I think it is labeled as a falsified memory.

I do agree that what a person might remember immediately can be somewhat different years later - even weeks and months.

The loss of all those interviews or statements is a major issue really and should never have happened.

JMO MOO JMT

The bloody man witness was always a mess, we didn’t even know who was changing her mind, her or what LE was writing down and how many times. But everyone was desperate to put him there at 4 so here we are.

 

[MassGuy]

The defense has claimed RA was and is competent, able to understand the charges against him and their penalties and that he has been able to cooperate with his attorney’s in his own defense.

RA is now attending court as competent as assured by his attorneys with nothing presented as impeding him from understanding and assisting in his defense.

Who are we to question if those who have his best interest in mind, the defense, say he was and is competent?

Accordingly we have to believe the note by RA is genuine but messy.

I’m not sure that critiquing a confession done by hand is fair.

It’s the content not the style of the writing that matters since we can assume he didn’t think he would be graded on it.


all imo

I agree. I also think it's way too early to really develop a solid opinion on those confessions, as we have yet to hear the context of them, as well the specific details.

We also don't know the nature of the confessions that were allegedly specific, in that they detailed things that only the killer could know.

So we have the potential of something that isn't as damaging as we think (incoherent ramblings of someone who was losing his mind), all the way to something that effectively buries him.

My sense is that it's going to be more towards the latter for the reasons you say, but we'll see. I can't wait until they get to that.

 

[katydid23]

I think one could read a sexual motive into crime due to Libby being naked and at one point Abby was partially or fully undressed, we will never know if Abby was fully naked at some point,
But lack of evidence that either were sexually abused means state can't presume to know what the intent of the perpetrator was, and whether it was sexually motivated so opining as he did in opening that RA took the girls to sexually assault them needs evidence,
The idea that he was disturbed is opinion not fact,

Who marches young girls off a bridge at gunpoint, forces them to undress, but is not 'sexually ' motivated. Forcing a young girl to undress IS sexual assault, by definition. He'd be arrested just for that if he had been caught before the murders.

 

[BUF]

This cross must have been a trip…

The jury asked several questions to Carbaugh after her cross examination. They asked how she was able to tell there was blood on the clothes and how she compared mud to blood. Carbaugh said she saw clear blood spatter. They also asked how far away from the man she was from her when she drove by. She said she was about three feet away. Baldwin chimed in and said she claimed she was 20 feet away in one of her interviews.

“I was driving,” Carbaugh snapped. “I didn’t [get] out and say, ‘Hey I was 17 inches away.’ No!”

https://www.wane.com/top-stories/he-was-covered-in-mud-and-blood-bridge-guy-witness-testimonies-continue/

 

[tlcya]

It puzzling how the P got her sighting right, but the D insisted she did not say bloody.

Richard Allen PCA source:

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

View attachment 540022

It's a mystery alright

Not sure how that could have been an honest mistake - of course, that's just my moo cow.

 

[Vern]

I predict a big boot. The theory is more outlandish than ever and Click has recently lost all credibility. JMO

To be fair, even Todd Click himself has outright dismissed the Odisnism Theory.

Here's the details from Todd Click regarding the Defence taking him out of context with their allegations in the Franks Memorandum:

Officer Click - There are two things that I would like to clear up immediately though. Detective Ferency and Detective Murphy were not Rushville cops. Detective Ferency was a detective from the Terre Haute police department that was assigned to the FBI joint terrorism task force. Detective Murphy was an Indiana state police detective that was also assigned to the FBI joint terrorism task force. So the FBI was associated with the investigation until at least July 2021. Secondly, no one in law enforcement believes Abby and Libby were killed in a ritual sacrifice. That is the defense twisting facts for sensationalism. You can quote me on those two items.

TMS - Some people have suggested that while you disagree with the defense that this was a ritual murder that you have agreement with them on who is responsible. Is that something you can speak to?

Officer Click - Yes, that is accurate.

TMS - Other than the material about the cult angle can you discuss how good a job the defense did discussing the evidence against their suspects?

At the Three Day Hearings we also found out that the "other suspects" that Click refers to were investigated and ruled out - and alibied. Ergo, the Defense's Franks Motion was DENIED.

 

[shonyakay]

I think one could read a sexual motive into crime due to Libby being naked and at one point Abby was partially or fully undressed, we will never know if Abby was fully naked at some point,
But lack of evidence that either were sexually abused means state can't presume to know what the intent of the perpetrator was, and whether it was sexually motivated so opining as he did in opening that RA took the girls to sexually assault them needs evidence,
The idea that he was disturbed is opinion not fact,

I am confident they have direct evidence by RA's own admission of this which Nick M alluded to on his cross with Dr. Perlmutter.

 

[m00c0w]

The bloody man witness was always a mess, we didn’t even know who was changing her mind, her or what LE was writing down and how many times. But everyone was desperate to put him there at 4 so here we are.

What do you mean “everyone was desperate to put him there at 4”?

The witness testimony of folks that saw BG was years before RA came about as a suspect. They had a general time of death from the autopsy, and were taking tips from people regarding this specific time. It also helps that there is actual video and audio of BG.

I can see the argument being made that RA is not BG, but I’m not sure that anyone was eager to put BG there at specific times as much as BG was just there at specific times and this is evident in the video, audio, and witness testimony.

Additionally, if RA wasn’t there at that time, all he has to do is provide an alibi. Instead, his defense team tries to move the murders to over 12 hours after they occurred according to the medical examiner.

All my opinion.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think one could read a sexual motive into crime due to Libby being naked and at one point Abby was partially or fully undressed, we will never know if Abby was fully naked at some point,
But lack of evidence that either were sexually abused means state can't presume to know what the intent of the perpetrator was, and whether it was sexually motivated so opining as he did in opening that RA took the girls to sexually assault them needs evidence,
The idea that he was disturbed is opinion not fact,

It's pretty obvious that a man who abducts 2 teenage girls at gunpoint in broad daylight, orders them to a secluded spot and forces them to undress is Sexual Assault in and of itself. He didn't have to physically molest them, it's about power and RA had the power over Abby & Libby with the help of his trusty SS P226.

Curious as to another reason to force them to remove their clothing?????? Seriously, why would RA have done this if not sexually motivated in some way.

It does take somebody VERY disturbed to do what was done to Abby & Libby, that isn't opinion, that is a fact.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

I'm specifically interested in a media link that supports the idea that they were at all alarmed by his presence as I've not seen one as of yet that suggests this. Any help in this regard would be most appreciated. Not interested in social media content (eg: Youtube / podcasts) as I am unlikely to bother with them. Ty in advance!

All of the media links support the idea the girls were alarmed because they all discuss that the girls were 'secretly' filming him as he was quickly approaching from behind.

Are you thinking they were not alarmed, but were just filming this stranger for some unknown reason?

What other reason would they have for filming him? Can you think of any?

 

[Melted]

It's my understanding that none of the third party individuals should even be mentioned here on the main thread.

As of now, they are not on trial.

JBC is a witness in this trial

 

[Megnut]

Impossible.

RA was on suicide watch from 1 April 2023.

3 March 2023 comes before 1 April 2023.

_Testimony of Warden John Galipeau Given at Hearing on Motion to Suppress Held July 31, 2024.pdf

drive.google.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848812492077617391

I read this as

I am ready to confess to killing Abby and Libby

For (because) I want the opportunity to apologize to the families.

IMO it's like an AA step. He has to admit what he's done AND make amends.

Confessing brings the timeline near. No lengthy trial, etc.

I think RA believes that apologizing is making amends, and thinks/thought that confessing would soothe his soul. Which I believe was a tortured soul, not tortured from without (guards, environment) but from within.

There is conflict within him.

And notably, even confessing is all about him. To make HIMself feel better. Nothing here about the pain he's inflicted on others.

JMO

 

[Vaderman]

Why wouldn't RA, a father himself, look down or away at those disturbing and graphic pictures? That really bothers me a lot and I'm sure it's not lost on the jury either.

JMO

I suspect if he looked down, we'd be on here demanding to know why he won't look at the pictures. Defendants are usually damned if they do, damned if they don't when it comes to courtroom reactions.

Edited for grammar.

 

[MiniMoo]

The bloody man witness was always a mess, we didn’t even know who was changing her mind, her or what LE was writing down and how many times. But everyone was desperate to put him there at 4 so here we are.

I saw some video footage of that road recently - it is quite narrow and nothing like what I would have imagined.

I doubt anyone driving it would miss the details of someone they drove by whatsoever unless flying by, distracted or not interested.

But if someone saw someone walking that stretch of road bloody and muddy or muddy and bloody why did they not stop to ask if that person was okay or at the very least report it to the police?

And now that I have seen that road and area it really makes me wonder.

JMO MOO JMT

 

[JAY CLUCK]

What do you mean “everyone was desperate to put him there at 4”?

The witness testimony of folks that saw BG was years before RA came about as a suspect. They had a general time of death from the autopsy, and were taking tips from people regarding this specific time. It also helps that there is actual video and audio of BG.

I can see the argument being made that RA is not BG, but I’m not sure that anyone was eager to put BG there at specific times as much as BG was just there at specific times and this is evident in the video, audio, and witness testimony.

Additionally, if RA wasn’t there at that time, all he has to do is provide an alibi. Instead, his defense team tries to move the murders to over 12 hours after they occurred according to the medical examiner.

All my opinion.

huh??? Of course it was older than RA. At least the first record of what she said. I’m saying if I’m a state P I’m dropping this witness.