Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #205

[EllaMinnowP]

<modsnip>

"This is the 112th time she has testified as a toolmark examiner and said her testimony has come in both federal and state jurisdictions. She most recently testified in a Marion County case in August."

"She said that over her 17-year career and 100+ criminal trials, her findings have never been found in error or reversed."

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

From the same link:

Oberg stood by her findings and stated her field only has an error rate of 2-2.5%. She said that over her 17-year career and 100+ criminal trials, her findings have never been found in error or reversed.

I’m no mathematician or statistician, but based on the provided numbers, she may be due for an error/ reversal. (JMO & not meaning to nitpick)

 

[ClearAhead]

Yeah and Andrea burkhart spoke about the shooting range last night on her live. Holeman asked RA if he shoots often and RA said no. I linked to her live a few times last night and don’t have the link handy so pls search for my prior posts if in doubt.

This is why it’s good the Judge is allowing the jury to view the entire video, so they can form their own opinion. They won’t hear outsiders shrieking about it.

 

[MassGuy]

I like your list.

For a brutal and frenzied double murder in broad daylight I'd have also wanted -

1. Direct evidence tying the accused to the crime scene
2. Direct evidence linking the victims to the accused
3. This includes DNA, fingerprints, blood contamination, digital forensics, cell phone tracking etc
4. Witnesses that could identify the accused rather than the guy on the video
5. More witnesses seeing the murder exit the scene and escaping covered in blood
6. More factual info about time and cause of death
7. An actual murder weapon (linking back to #1&2)
8. A more compelling investigation & presentation of the infamous DTH video

I concede that I obviously know I'm not going to get much if any of the above from what we have seen so far IMO.

Pretty disappointing for $4m IMO.

Money cannot buy things that do not exist.

You sit back and do nothing; letting this case go without a resolution forever.

Or you move forward with what you have.

 

[FrostedGlass]

From the same link:

Oberg stood by her findings and stated her field only has an error rate of 2-2.5%. She said that over her 17-year career and 100+ criminal trials, her findings have never been found in error or reversed.

I’m no mathematician or statistician, but based on the provided numbers, she may be due for an error/ reversal. (JMO & not meaning to nitpick)

MOO
Does she ever say how many times over her career she tested unspent rounds?
I'm really not feeling it if there was a problem with results so she tried something else.

 

[WildHuncher]

From the same link:

Oberg stood by her findings and stated her field only has an error rate of 2-2.5%. She said that over her 17-year career and 100+ criminal trials, her findings have never been found in error or reversed.

I’m no mathematician or statistician, but based on the provided numbers, she may be due for an error/ reversal. (JMO & not meaning to nitpick)

Gambler’s Fallacy. The dice have no memory. They don’t know a different outcome is past due.

Gambler's fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ETA:
What she’s really trying to show is that the dice are loaded. She’s good.

What she didn’t say so far as we know is that she has always been on the winning side.

 

[Bergmann]

Money cannot buy things that do not exist.

You sit back and do nothing; letting this case go without a resolution forever.

Or you move forward with what you have.

Yes I agree a need to move forward and make progress - we all want to see justice etc.

IMO the standard of evidence they do have is insufficient to bring a case against RA because IMO it doesn't meet the standard (so far/ to date) to be able to be reach BARD. Also and again just an opinion, its just never stacked up in my own mind and nothing presented has been significant enough to alter this.

My real problem is that I still feel IMO that the original LE investigation was incredibly flawed and after 5 years has landed on who they had rather than who actually did it but again that's just opinion, and here we are.

All JMO.

 

[INfisherman]

From the same link:

Oberg stood by her findings and stated her field only has an error rate of 2-2.5%. She said that over her 17-year career and 100+ criminal trials, her findings have never been found in error or reversed.

I’m no mathematician or statistician, but based on the provided numbers, she may be due for an error/ reversal. (JMO & not meaning to nitpick)

Her field. Wouldn’t that include other toolmark analysts as well?

And she might be due for one & if that does happen, we will never know if was her testimony or something completely different that led to it.

 

[MassGuy]

MOO
Does she ever say how many times over her career she tested unspent rounds?
I'm really not feeling it if was a problem with results so she tried something else.

I would venture to guess she had never tested an unspent round before.

At your standard crime scene you’re going to have spent casings to test. The only place I’d expect to see an unspent round is an armed robbery, and even that would be rare.

 

[Boxer]

One in the chamber ready to be fired but magazine is full, not one bullet in the gun.

Thanks

 

[MassGuy]

Yes I agree a need to move forward and make progress - we all want to see justice etc.

IMO the standard of evidence they do have is insufficient to bring a case against RA because IMO it doesn't meet the standard (so far/ to date) to be able to be reach BARD. Also and again just an opinion, its just never stacked up in my own mind and nothing presented has been significant enough to alter this.

My real problem is that I still feel IMO that the original LE investigation was incredibly flawed and after 5 years has landed on who they had rather than who actually did it but again that's just opinion, and here we are.

All JMO.

They had so many better suspects; the exact types of people you’d expect would do something like this. We know that two of them were extensively investigated, to no avail.

It’s not like they went out of their way to make this guy fit, as he didn’t have that type of background. They simply had an oh moment, when they saw that piece of paper and knew they very likely had their man.

His own words and gun solidified that.

 

[Boxer]

Why was this expert not vetted appropriately? They dont need to claim the 100% it cycled through his gun. Only that it is consistent with cycling.
Were there photographic exhibits for this?

 

[Salah11]

They had so many better suspects; the exact types of people you’d expect would do something like this. We know that two of them were extensively investigated, to no avail.

It’s not like they went out of their way to make this guy fit, as he didn’t have that type of background. They simply had an oh *advertiser censored* moment, when they saw that piece of paper and knew they very likely had their man.

His own words and gun solidified that.

Exactly he placed himself at the scene and then has no alibi and admitted he was dressed basically like the killer.

Moo

 

[Megnut]

I think we can all agree RA is a witness.

So I'll call him one.

The group of juveniles were witnesses. 4 girls iiuc, one much younger. All saw one man, whom they each described differently. Verified timestamps.

RA saw a group of juveniles. Raging debate over 4 or 3. 4 isn't 3. 3 isn't 4. But RA supplied a KEY detail, he thought there was babysitting. IMO there's the 4th -- the young one being babysat. Dispute settled as far as I'm concerned. He saw three teens and a little (the little being babysat). Locks the timestamp.

BB saw that group crossing the bridge as they were leaving and she was arriving. Verified time stamp. BB begins her third loop. So far, she's seen zero men.

Sister drops AW and KG off, I'll estimate 1:49 but I'm sure that can be tweaked from LG's phone, sister's phone, and CCTV.

AW and LG start along the path.

BB approaches the bridge. Sees one man. On the platform.

RA says he was on the platform. He gives several time possibilities. 1 to 3, corrected to 1:30 to 3:30, later noon to 1:30, and another time posited later as leaving at 2:15. Best we can do is show he was there at least at the same time as the juveniles (and there are verified timestamps for that), plus time to reach the platform where BB saw the one man and he said he watched fish.

No one saw another man, not even RA. He describes himself as wearing jeans, a jacket, a head covering, a scarf, I think he called it.

After seeing one man on the bridge, BB turns back, passing AW and LG as they continue toward the bridge. Some time after 1:49 but before the 2:06 photo. Solid timestamps.

AW and LG reach the bridge. Whether a man is still on the bridge, we don't know. Perhaps they met the man on the path, walking or on a bench or waited for him to leave the bridge.

At 2:13, LG begins recording a man, one RA never reported seeing, on the bridge behind them. A man wearing blue jeans, a blue jacket, a hat.

If RA was leaving at 1:27, he wouldn't have seen the juveniles where they saw him. If he arrived at 1:27 and made his way to the MHB, he would have been on pace to be on the bridge right about the time BB reached her turning point.

The man every witness saw but RA is on the bridge.

Headscratcher for RA too. "If that's from the girls' camera, that's not me." Then who is, RA? Because it's either you or it's not-you and one of you pushed the other off the bridge.

Because you're both on it.

RA is IMO the last man standing.

As good a witness as the others, for what he self-reported. They supply his timestamps, he confirms them, he describes the man they saw, same as the one LG recorded, when he described himself.

He can't get off the bridge. That is, until he forced two little girls off the bridge at gunpoint and on DTH.

JMO

 

[Deleted member 296739]

My real problem is that I still feel IMO that the original LE investigation was incredibly flawed and after 5 years has landed on who they had rather than who actually did it but again that's just opinion, and here we are.

I have the same problem- and wonder what other leads, witnesses, evidence went missing, marked cleared, or was misfiled…

None of this is to say RA didn’t do it or wasn’t involved- but nothing that they’ve shown to date has really tied RA to BG or the crime scene and how RA acted in the first days coming forward and then living his life normally for 5 years is how I might imagine an innocent person to act vs a homicidal maniac- in my opinion

That said if he’s guilty, it’s profoundly unfortunate that the early evidence was lost, interviews deleted by accident, his file remained mislabeled, his lead sheet was marked cleared AND the detectives didn’t follow up with the one person who came forward and looked like the guy that they had been asking to talk to-

The series of problems with the investigation are as hard for me to understand as the bullet, and other evidence in the case

Moo

 

[INfisherman]

Why was this expert not vetted appropriately? They dont need to claim the 100% it cycled through his gun. Only that it is consistent with cycling.
Were there photographic exhibits for this?

According to this there were.

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.

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

 

[mrjitty]

it really is bizarre that the defence lied about so many things if the case is so weak?

MOO

 

[sunshineray]

I wonder if he thought if he asked for a lawyer they would say "ok, the questioning is over we are placing you under arrest" maybe he thought his goose was already cooked. I watch a lot of interrogation videos and in a lot of them, when the perp is being questioned and then ask for a lawyer, the cops then say "well we can't ask you any more questions but we are placing you under arrest" but that is when the police have enough evidence to arrest the person already without the interview it seems.

And they did arrest him that day.

 

[sunshineray]

Right?! My thought is at that time, he was still trying to give his wife a vibe that this was all a mistake and they'll be going home soon... Maybe he just wanted her out of there due to shame, so suggested a lawyer so she could leave and not be with him there. Perhaps her presence was making him even more UNcomfortable than at ease? JMO would love more thoughts on this!

Well it could very well be. Didn't RA say at one point to his wife, (paraphrasing) tell me if it gets to be too much for you and I'll tell them everything they want to know. MO

 

[WildHuncher]

I think we can all agree RA is a witness.

So I'll call him one.

The group of juveniles were witnesses. 4 girls iiuc, one much younger. All saw one man, whom they each described differently. Verified timestamps.

RA saw a group of juveniles. Raging debate over 4 or 3. 4 isn't 3. 3 isn't 4. But RA supplied a KEY detail, he thought there was babysitting. IMO there's the 4th -- the young one being babysat. Dispute settled as far as I'm concerned. He saw three teens and a little (the little being babysat). Locks the timestamp.

BB saw that group crossing the bridge as they were leaving and she was arriving. Verified time stamp. BB begins her third loop. So far, she's seen zero men.

Sister drops AW and KG, I'll estimate 1:49 but I'm sure that can be tweaked from LG's phone, sister's phone, and CCTV.

AW and LG start along the path.

BB approaches the bridge. Sees one man. On the platform.

RA says he was on the platform. He gives several time possibilities. 1 to 3, corrected to 1:30 to 3:30, later noon to 1:30, and another time posited later as leaving at 2:15. Best we can do is show he was there at least at the same time as the juveniles (and there are verified timestamps for that), plus time to reach the platform where BB saw the one man and he said he watched fish.

No one saw another man, not even RA. He describes himself as wearing jeans, a jacket, a head covering, a scarf, I think he called it.

After seeing one man on the bridge, BB turns back, passing AW and LG as they continue toward the bridge. In the after 1:49 but before the 2:06 photo. Solid timestamps.

AW and LG reach the bridge. Whether a man is still on the bridge, we don't know. Perhaps they met the man on the path, walking or on a bench or waited for him to leave the bridge.

At 2:13, LG begins recording a man, one RA never reported seeing, on the bridge behind them. A man wearing blue jeans, a blue jacket, a hat.

If RA was leaving at 1:27, he wouldn't have seen the juveniles where they saw him. If he arrived at 1:27 and made his way to the MHB, he would have been on pace to be on the bridge right about the time BB reached her turning point.

The man every witness saw but RA is on the bridge.

Headscratcher for RA too. "If that's from the girls' camera, that's not me." Then who is, RA? Because it's either you or it's not-you and one of you pushed the other off the bridge.

Because you're both on it.

RA is IMO the last man standing.

As good a witness as the others, for what he self-reported. They establish his timestamps, he confirms them, he describes the man they saw, same as the one LG recorded, when he described himself.

He can't get off the bridge. That is, until he forced two little girls off the bridge at gunpoint and on DTH.

JMO

Exactly. He put himself there in BG’s clothing just before BB, Abby, and Libby arrived. A group of girls saw a man in BG’s clothing and RA saw a group of girls.

By his own report, he went to the first platform. He had nowhere to go without him, BB, *somebody* noting that there are two near-twin males on the trail. Nobody did.

ETA: He could not have missed seeing Abby and Libby, but he says he did.

He’s unseen by anybody for a long time. Then SC, under oath in a court of law, reports seeing BG, very muddy and bloody.

 

[INfisherman]

Pretty disappointing for $4m IMO.

RSBM

About,$1.75m so far. We haven’t reached the half way point yet.
<modsnip>

JMO