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

[MassGuy]

So…a question for those of you more familiar with these types of guns. What sort of things would cause a round to be ejected accidentally and possibly unnoticed by the carrier? Would dropping a gin that’s ready to be fired have the ability to eject the ammo? My thinking was it would have been locked in and would have to be physically ejected a specific way.

I only own a Glock, but it functions the same way. The only way to eject a round is to do it intentionally. It can't just fall out, as it requires the slide to be pulled back manually; dropping it would not do it.

You rack the slide to put one in the chamber. However, if a round is already in the chamber, then it will be ejected during this process, and replace by one from the magazine.

Some people in court believed they heard him rack the slide during the "down the hill" period. If this is true, then he may have forgotten when he racked it again at the murder scene, likely in an act of intimidation.

He probably realized he did it at the time, but forgot to pick it up afterwards. It's also possible (it was buried I guess), that he just couldn't find it.

 

[m00c0w]

I wondered that too, I hope we get clarification. I have thought how did they test it against other guns without firing it, did they cycle it through the guns they were testing it against,
I have hope that they didn't do anything to it except for DNA and fingerprints as the bullet has to be in the condition it was found it for it to even begin to have any validity
I still don't think it is scientific to have to fire the cartridge in order to test it, the markings on it if there are any pre firing are the marks that reflect the cycling through that was all that was done when it was found,
But if states witness can show me peer reviewed scientific papers showing that this is an acceptable scientific was to do the testing I will read papers and see what they have to say

They “tested” other rounds for comparison to that one. The original evidentiary item stays the same, largely untouched. Photographs at high magnification are taken of the markings on the original round. The test cartridges are cycled or fired using the suspect weapon, and then similar types of photographs are taken of those. The photographs are compared to each other to see if specific markings, deformities, defects are present and consistent on both rounds after being fired.

Similar to fingerprints. You don’t put the collected fingerprint on someone’s finger to see if it matches.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

Long, technical morning to open Day 7 in the Delphi murders trial of Richard Allen.

Lone witness: Melissa Oberg, who tested the unspent .40 caliber S&W cartridge found near the bodies of Abby Williams and Libby German in 2017 and an Sig Sauer P226 pistol Allen owned. 1/


Much of the testimony has been about processes she used at Indiana State Police lab, extractor and ejectors and other tools on guns. Lunch came while she was still being questioned by the prosecution. 2/

Oberg called the cartridge she received Feb. 17, 2017, was in good condition, with no signs of corrosion, fibers, biological material.‘Basically it was unremarkable to me,’ she said. 3/


She testified she tested 3 other guns brought to her in Feb 2017 that didn’t match ejection, extraction marks on the cartridgeShe testified that tests in October 2022 identified the Sig Sauer P226 — the one from a search of Allen’s home — as the one that cycled the cartridge 4/


She was still going through the identification process when a technical issue with a TV showing evidence came up. That was at noon. Back in session at 1 pm.

@localguydonnie@93wibc 5/

 

[photographer4]

they 100% could. I suspect that a suspect or POI might worry that would give the LEO a certain negative impression which in turn could cause LEOs to look even harder at the person IMO.

Not to mention if it was done at the police station there is a greater chance that that initial interaction between RA and LE back in 2017 would have been at least audio taped as most people believe through watching TV and trials that interview rooms at police stations are equipped with recording capability.

Dulin didn’t have a recording?

 

[m00c0w]

I only own a Glock, but it functions the same way. The only way to eject a round is to do it intentionally. It can't just fall out, as it requires the slide to be pulled back manually; dropping it would not do it.

You rack the slide to put one in the chamber. However, if a round is already in the chamber, then it will be ejected during this process, and replace by one from the magazine.

Some people in court believed they heard him rack the slide during the "down the hill" period. If this is true, then he may have forgotten when he racked it again at the murder scene, likely in an act of intimidation.

He probably realized he did it at the time, but forgot to pick it up afterwards. It's also possible (it was buried I guess), that he just couldn't find it.

My theory is that he collected the cartridge, but it fell out of his jacket pocket at some point during the murders. He didn’t even realize it was gone until much later.

JMO

 

[joe jones]

Nobody fired the evidence round!

That is not a thing!

MOO

I know that's the last sentence they fired cartridges that were similar to crime scene cartridge

 

[KSwizzle]

Wait did they fire the bullets to compare? How is that apples to apples they should be comparing a racked unshot bullet to racked unshot bullet they found at the crime scene

 

[MassGuy]

Wait did they fire the bullets to compare? How is that apples to apples they should be comparing a racked unshot bullet to racked unshot bullet they found at the crime scene

We should be getting updates soon, and I'd bet a lot of money the defense brings this up. Apparently that's the recommended process though. Both processes require the casing to come in contact with the extractor and the ejector.

 

[Web_Sleuth]

I only own a Glock, but it functions the same way. The only way to eject a round is to do it intentionally. It can't just fall out, as it requires the slide to be pulled back manually; dropping it would not do it.

You rack the slide to put one in the chamber. However, if a round is already in the chamber, then it will be ejected during this process, and replace by one from the magazine.

Some people in court believed they heard him rack the slide during the "down the hill" period. If this is true, then he may have forgotten when he racked it again at the murder scene, likely in an act of intimidation.

He probably realized he did it at the time, but forgot to pick it up afterwards. It's also possible (it was buried I guess), that he just couldn't find it.

Might be reading too much into it, but would be interesting if the other bullet from the keepsake box was the other one he “racked”. I don’t recall if that one was clean - it may not have had marks. Just thinking through.

 

[MrsWatson]

An interesting article from Scientific American regarding the validity of firearms testing.

 

[TTF14]

Excuse the dumb question, as I know very little about guns, but why wouldn't there be at least a fingerprint on the bullet casing? Are bullets in a cartridge loaded as a group (in a cartridge) into a gun? So if the bullet was wiped clean of prints at the factory and loaded into a cartridge (with other bullets) for purchase, only the cartridge would be likely to have the handler's prints? Do bullets come preloaded into cartridges?

Not an opinion or fact, but genuine questions because I don't understand.

 

[iamshadow21]

Excuse the dumb question, as I know very little about guns, but why wouldn't there be at least a fingerprint on the bullet casing? Are bullets in a cartridge loaded as a group (in a cartridge) into a gun? So if the bullet was wiped clean of prints at the factory and loaded into a cartridge (with other bullets) for purchase, only the cartridge would be likely to have the handler's prints? Do bullets come preloaded into cartridges?

Not an opinion or fact, but genuine questions because I don't understand.

I think it's all made and packaged by machines.

 

[Vaderman]

Might be reading too much into it, but would be interesting if the other bullet from the keepsake box was the other one he “racked”. I don’t recall if that one was clean - it may not have had marks. Just thinking through.

It's been awhile since I've viewed my own ammo, but I'd be interested to know if ammo contains lot numbers/serial numbers on each individual round.

 

[Justice101]

I only own a Glock, but it functions the same way. The only way to eject a round is to do it intentionally. It can't just fall out, as it requires the slide to be pulled back manually; dropping it would not do it.

You rack the slide to put one in the chamber. However, if a round is already in the chamber, then it will be ejected during this process, and replace by one from the magazine.

Some people in court believed they heard him rack the slide during the "down the hill" period. If this is true, then he may have forgotten when he racked it again at the murder scene, likely in an act of intimidation.

He probably realized he did it at the time, but forgot to pick it up afterwards. It's also possible (it was buried I guess), that he just couldn't find it.

Another thought is that he had already racked that bullet and had put it in his coat pocket.. .then during the period he was very active killing them, removing clothing, redressing, etc.. the previously racked bullet fell out of his pocket.

But I can see a "re-rack" doing that too.

 

[WildHuncher]

Thank you. So what kinds of things can cause it to be “manually ejected”? Only a hand or could dropping cause that? Something else..?

You have to grab the slide (a part of the gun on the top of the barrel) and snap it back. The cartridge will go back until it hits a post and is tilted out an ejection port exposed by that rearward travel. Letting go of the slide will chamber a new round from the top of the magazine.

Other than that and actually firing the gun, that cartridge is completely enclosed in solid metal.

 

[m00c0w]

Wait did they fire the bullets to compare? How is that apples to apples they should be comparing a racked unshot bullet to racked unshot bullet they found at the crime scene

It looks like she may have done both according to fox59’s reporting:

Oberg displayed images showing “areas of agreement” in marks. Her testimony included various photos of Allen’s gun, the marks in question and the gun’s ejector and extractor.

Oberg told the court she cycled and fired rounds from Allen’s gun so she could compare the marks to the cartridge found at the murder scene.

https://fox59.com/delphi-trial/delphi-murders-forensic-firearms-examiner-discusses-toolmark-methodology-unspent-bullet-evidence/

Firing would make some sense as it would theoretically give a stronger impression/toolmark to more clearly see defects. It’s not like firing it would somehow make the markings match more closely, for some reason. They don’t know how hard the slide was racked to eject the original round, so they go full-send as a baseline.

If you gently step in some wet sand and stomp in some wet sand, the deformities in your shoe should generally match in both instances. They will likely be more apparent in the stomp version, though, which would allow you to look more closely for evidence of them in the lighter impression.

Let’s not forget she tested other firearms that did not match.

JMO

 

[Justice101]

My theory is that he collected the cartridge, but it fell out of his jacket pocket at some point during the murders. He didn’t even realize it was gone until much later.

JMO

That is where I am. If he reracked it he would probably have seen it ejected and would have frantically looked for it. it was found close to their bodies so should have been found unless it fell down under some leaves or grass/moss

Like you, if it fell out of his jacket pocket, it is left there for good.

 

[Justice101]

It looks like she may have done both according to fox59’s reporting.

Firing would make some sense as it would theoretically give a stronger impression/toolmark to more clearly see defects. It’s not like firing it would somehow make the markings match more closely, for some reason. They don’t know how hard the slide was racked to eject the original round, so they go full-send as a baseline.

If you gently step in some wet sand and stomp in some wet sand, the deformities in your shoe should generally match in both instances. They will likely be more apparent in the stomp version, though, which would allow you to look more closely for evidence of them in the lighter impression.

Let’s not forget she tested other firearms that did not match.

JMO

EXCELLENT analogy m00cow!

 

[gremlin444]

Meh... they saw a guy on the bridge. Doesn't make him a killer imo. In this day and age, I want the state to prove to me that the man on trial is the man who killed the kids. Do this with DNA and electronics. Show me why it cannot have been someone else. Given our forensic capabilities from 2017 to now - I'm afraid knowing only what we know so far, I'd be the juror that would NOT convict him. So far nothing electronic has linked RA to the crime yet?? Patiently waiting on the proverbial fence to be moved one way or the other.... MOOO

RE: DNA. From the images of Bridge Guy and the location of the bodies, it makes sense to me that there was no Bridge Guy DNA found. He was completely covered--hat on, so no hairs....long sleeved coat, so no scratched arms leading to DNA from under the girls' fingernails. Given the hat, coat, and being described as being overdressed for the weather, gloves would be a natural assumption. At that point all you have exposed is the face--and he was reported by witnesses as having a running mask or similar on covering the lower half of his face. If he was interrupted before a physical SA could be attempted/completed upon the girls as reported, no DNA there.

There might have been a small chance for a bit touch DNA on the girls' necks as he attacked them (if he took off/wasn't wearing gloves)...but that would likely be lost in the sheer amount of their own blood.

 

[Ravenmoon]

Excuse the dumb question, as I know very little about guns, but why wouldn't there be at least a fingerprint on the bullet casing? Are bullets in a cartridge loaded as a group (in a cartridge) into a gun? So if the bullet was wiped clean of prints at the factory and loaded into a cartridge (with other bullets) for purchase, only the cartridge would be likely to have the handler's prints? Do bullets come preloaded into cartridges?

Not an opinion or fact, but genuine questions because I don't understand.

Because casings are exposed to gunpowder residue, hot temperatures and high pressure while still in the gun, fingerprint compounds such as amino acids and lipids are often evaporated and/or degraded by the time those casings are ejected. Obtaining a usable print from whatever's left is therefore challenging, made even more so by the fact that the casings are cylindrical –

New technique excels at lifting fingerprints from shell casings.