Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #204

Status
Not open for further replies.
I mean, that's nothing new. We knew a long time ago it was fast and done. Someone will provide you with the good links but this isn't a a ha moment in the slightest
Defense has been pretending the girls were taken away and brought back. To me, this helps confirm they were already deceased by 4 pm. They never left the area.
 
So, several say that they really require DNA for them to be sure.

Even the presence of DNA doesn't stop people from doubting in other cases. We have Bryan Kohberger with his DNA found in the grooves of the clasp of a knife sheath--when a knife of some sort is known to be what was used in the murders --underneath/between the bodies of two of the murdered victims. And people still argue that isn't valid--the sheath could have belonged to one of the girls or a different murderer and unlucky BK could have just touched it at a knife store while trying out the clasp and didn't end up buying it. Or it could have been contaminated in the lab. Or the murderer could have gotten BK's DNA off the door handle of his car and put in the grooves of the sheath in order to frame him. I've seen all of those arguments, by both people on this board and by his lawyers.

Exactly. Often when DNA is found on a SA victim the accused explains DNA away by claiming a consensual act had taken place, then later he left and another character came along and murdered the victim.

Evidence beyond just DNA is required to convict.

Same goes for this case, the onus is on the P to prove BG wasn’t just hovering around the bridge, that in fact he was the murderer of Libby and Abby.


JMO
 
@localguydonnie

Going through #Delphi trial pool notes that just came in before 4 o’clock…

Allen’s attorney Brad Rozzi during cross examination of Melissa Oberg, expert who pinned Allen’s gun as the source of the cartridge found near girl’s bodies…
R: An unspent round and fired round are two different things.
Oberg: They’re all loaded into a firearm the same way. Only difference is pressure. Ejector mark is ejector whether it’s fired or cycled. Firing process could use more research, but not the tool marking process
R: Could have been cycled through other firearm?
Oberg: It is possible.

Going through more notes (email compression makes the notes very tough to read)…
R: You can’t say with any certainty where it (new cartridge used in testing) came from before you got it?
Oberg: No.
R: You don’t have a photo of that round in your 14-page report.
Oberg: No, it was in my original notes.They talk about other rounds used in testing. Oberg chose to use the test fired round because it marked better than cycled rounds.
R: (Those) aren’t the same.
Oberg: “I don’t consider them different. They just didn’t mark as well.”•I think she’s referring to the test rounds that were cycled but again, pool notes are hard to read…



Rozzi continues to stress how the cycled crime scene cartridge and the test fired cartridge are not the same thing.

Oberg: “I will keep repeating it’s the same way (loading cartridge), it just has a different pressure.”They continue to talk about specific extractors, gun builds, the condition of Allen’s gun, the tool marking verification process, who would make the final call if there were differing opinions.
Rozzi asked if Allen’s gun condition could produce different markings in 2017 and 2022.
Oberg responded with “can’t say. Should be similarities.”
R: Fair for jury to draw its own conclusions based on photos of the test fired round?
Oberg: Yes.
State Objected.
Judge sustained…


When going back to the discussion of expert disagreements and verification and who would have final say over analysis…
R: “At the end of the day, it’s subjective.”
Oberg: “I don’t know how you objectively measure subjectivity.”
Oberg said she’s never had someone disagree with her analysis.

Court back in session. Will update this information once more is received.

 
@localguydonnie

Going through #Delphi trial pool notes that just came in before 4 o’clock…

Allen’s attorney Brad Rozzi during cross examination of Melissa Oberg, expert who pinned Allen’s gun as the source of the cartridge found near girl’s bodies…R: An unspent round and fired round are two different things.Oberg: They’re all loaded into a firearm the same way. Only difference is pressure. Ejector mark is ejector whether it’s fired or cycled. Firing process could use more research, but not the tool marking processR: Could have been cycled through other firearm?Oberg: It is possible.

Going through more notes (email compression makes the notes very tough to read)…R: You can’t say with any certainty where it (new cartridge used in testing) came from before you got it?Oberg: No.R: You don’t have a photo of that round in your 14-page report.Oberg: No, it was in my original notes.They talk about other rounds used in testing. Oberg chose to use the test fired round because it marked better than cycled rounds.R: (Those) aren’t the same.Oberg: “I don’t consider them different. They just didn’t mark as well.”•I think she’s referring to the test rounds that were cycled but again, pool notes are hard to read…



Rozzi continues to stress how the cycled crime scene cartridge and the test fired cartridge are not the same thing.Oberg: “I will keep repeating it’s the same way (loading cartridge), it just has a different pressure.”They continue to talk about specific extractors, gun builds, the condition of Allen’s gun, the tool marking verification process, who would make the final call if there were differing opinions.Rozzi asked if Allen’s gun condition could produce different markings in 2017 and 2022. Oberg responded with “can’t say. Should be similarities.”R: Fair for jury to draw its own conclusions based on photos of the test fired round?Oberg: Yes.State Objected. Judge sustained…


When going back to the discussion of expert disagreements and verification and who would have final say over analysis…R: “At the end of the day, it’s subjective.”Oberg: “I don’t know how you objectively measure subjectivity.”Oberg said she’s never had someone disagree with her analysis.Court back in session. Will update this information once more is received.

Oh man, she had some great retorts there. This one is my favorite:

“I don’t know how you objectively measure subjectivity.”

Just beautiful
 
Good grief, what did he have in mind? No wonder jurors are staying away!!!

Rozzi puts on gloves and begins to pull out the Sig Sauer, he moves on after meeting with the Judge.

Pretty minor considering at the Murdaugh trial, defense attorney Harpootlian, while handling a rifle, pointed it at the prosecution table, smiled and said, “tempting”…or something like that.
Inappropriate to say the least.
 
Wait, WHAT!? I missed this. If a text came through at 4:06 PM, then Libby was already being held against her will or most likely, already deceased. She would have answered her grandma.

I agree. By that time Libby was dead, dying, or still fighting for her life.

Probably one of her last thoughts was how worried her grandma would be.

Catch your killer, Libby! Catch Abby’s killer!

I so admire you, Libby, for your courage and presence of mind to turn your camera on BG when you had to be so terrified.

JMO
 


DELPHI — Kelsi German stops, the gravel beneath her feet ceasing its crunching. She gazes at the memorial honoring her sister and her sister’s best friend, both of whom died three years ago.

 
To be fair, yesterday Holeman took out the gun to show it to the jury for the first time, explained that he needed to check to make sure it was completely empty before it was further handled, and he proceeded to rack it twice. Murder Sheet said in last nights episode that in the quiet courtroom it was really loud and unnerving, given the theory that racking it was how the murderer threatened the girls into compliance.


"Holeman then opened a box containing the gun found at Allen’s home. He gave it a quick check to assure it was safe before displaying it to jurors."
BBM
This is what I call a calculated stroke of genius. It was loud and unnerving. Wowzer! What a way to bring this back around to how racking it was how the murderer threatened the girls into compliance.
 
@localguydonnie

Going through #Delphi trial pool notes that just came in before 4 o’clock…

Allen’s attorney Brad Rozzi during cross examination of Melissa Oberg, expert who pinned Allen’s gun as the source of the cartridge found near girl’s bodies…
R: An unspent round and fired round are two different things.
Oberg: They’re all loaded into a firearm the same way. Only difference is pressure. Ejector mark is ejector whether it’s fired or cycled. Firing process could use more research, but not the tool marking process
R: Could have been cycled through other firearm?
Oberg: It is possible.

Going through more notes (email compression makes the notes very tough to read)…
R: You can’t say with any certainty where it (new cartridge used in testing) came from before you got it?
Oberg: No.
R: You don’t have a photo of that round in your 14-page report.
Oberg: No, it was in my original notes.They talk about other rounds used in testing. Oberg chose to use the test fired round because it marked better than cycled rounds.
R: (Those) aren’t the same.
Oberg: “I don’t consider them different. They just didn’t mark as well.”•I think she’s referring to the test rounds that were cycled but again, pool notes are hard to read…



Rozzi continues to stress how the cycled crime scene cartridge and the test fired cartridge are not the same thing.

Oberg: “I will keep repeating it’s the same way (loading cartridge), it just has a different pressure.”They continue to talk about specific extractors, gun builds, the condition of Allen’s gun, the tool marking verification process, who would make the final call if there were differing opinions.
Rozzi asked if Allen’s gun condition could produce different markings in 2017 and 2022.
Oberg responded with “can’t say. Should be similarities.”
R: Fair for jury to draw its own conclusions based on photos of the test fired round?
Oberg: Yes.
State Objected.
Judge sustained…


When going back to the discussion of expert disagreements and verification and who would have final say over analysis…
R: “At the end of the day, it’s subjective.”
Oberg: “I don’t know how you objectively measure subjectivity.”
Oberg said she’s never had someone disagree with her analysis.

Court back in session. Will update this information once more is received.

Is there another media reporting on this?? I just don't care for this particular media guy. He seems so....pro defense without saying it.
 
I'm not exactly sure I'm hoping that when I read a transcript they explain that to the jury along with other factors that could be in play as in how well was RA maintaining and using is firearm, there's no corrosion on the bullet but explain to me the juror how long it takes to be corroded in the weather conditions present and how the said bullet was in the ground, let me show you how when I did these tests it was approximately the same temperature and atmospheric pressure as when this happened outside etc etc
I cannot testify to the jacket or bullet, but certain corrosions can take years to develop on aluminum. How long should we wait for these test results? There are also different types of corrosion so more tests. Also, corrosion tests are destructive & it’s already been stated the round that was found needs to be kept intact for the tool markings as proof (the master template). Had they tested other rounds, they’d probably be scrutinized for doing so in that it’s "not the exact round".

To be clear, I’m trying to remain neutral because we’re not even half way through the trial. They’ve already described how the bullet was found in the ground & photos were provided, that’s part of chain of custody. The P doesn’t need proof with any doubt, just reasonable doubt. Evidently they feel based on their experience, they have that. Prior case law involving ballistics would also set precedent as far as how much is needed.

I respect that you’re an engineer, but if you’ve ever been involved in durability testing, it’s usually never performed until complete failure, at least not for every test & in a manufacturing sense. That is unreasonable & not cost effective.

You’re not necessarily wrong but your expectations are more than what is needed in this case.

JMO
 
I think its good they have expressed concerns about his mental state really. Clearly there have been some issues with mental health / medications administered etc... MOOO.
There are many people who don’t care that his mental state and medications received could have greatly influenced his “confessions”. As long as he said the words, that’s all that matters to them.
BBM
This is what I call a calculated stroke of genius. It was loud and unnerving. Wowzer! What a way to bring this back around to how racking it was how the murderer threatened the girls into compliance.
What a way of reminding the jury they never heard that sound in the video played for them…
 
If today did go as well for the prosecution as it seems, I wonder how the defense plans to combat this. Their cross appears to have been ineffectual, and we know Gull previously ruled that the expert they planned to call cannot testify, as he was not a firearms expert. He was a strange choice to begin with, but I wonder if they had to go that route because they couldn't find a firearms expert to combat the state's expert.

They've got to do something, but I don't know what they can do at this stage.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
207
Guests online
841
Total visitors
1,048

Forum statistics

Threads
625,967
Messages
18,517,239
Members
240,914
Latest member
CalvinJ
Back
Top