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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bring forward this from the trial:

"The FBI’s Evidence Response Team (ERT) collected the evidence found in Deer Creek, Olehy said. The items were being watched by the Tippecanoe County Sheriff’s Office Dive Team.

The ERT collected several items of clothing believed to belong to the girls. Those items include a grey zip-up hoodie that Abby borrowed from Kelsi (German) Siebert, Libby’s sister, a tie-dyed t-shirt that Libby was wearing in a photo taken of her and Abby in Kelsi’s car on their way to the trails on Feb. 13, 2017, a black girls’ cami, size 28 girls jeans found inside out, a pink no-show sock, a dark blue or black no-show sock, a left Nike shoe, and a white bandana or handkerchief. The grey hoodie was completely submerged in the water."


View attachment 541267

“White bandana or handkerchief”. How could it be a handkerchief? I thought they went the way of the dinosaur in and about the 1960s when Kleenex took over? Otherwise a handkerchief, even laundered, should’ve ordinarily been an excellent source for DNA. Unfortunate it appears not. JMO
 
If you look at that still of BG he has his hands in his pockets, but you can see just a little bit of light area from his sleeve to his pockets. Is this his wrists?

Did he have latex gloves on when he took his hands out of his pockets and held the gun at the girls? Did they see this?

Maybe thats why he kept hands in pocket while walking across that dangerous bridge to hide the gloves.
 
If you look at that still of BG he has his hands in his pockets, but you can see just a little bit of light area from his sleeve to his pockets. Is this his wrists?

Did he have latex gloves on when he took his hands out of his pockets and held the gun at the girls? Did they see this?

That’s a fascinating thought! Why anyone would walk across the bridge with their hands in their pockets has been pondered a lot. Maybe to hide what they’re wearing on their hands! Sure could be.
 
“White bandana or handkerchief”. How could it be a handkerchief? I thought they went the way of the dinosaur in and about the 1960s when Kleenex took over? Otherwise a handkerchief, even laundered, should’ve ordinarily been an excellent source for DNA. Unfortunate it appears not. JMO

I think some people could identify a bandana as a handkerchief. But yeah lol they are definitely antiquated.
 
Anyone else find it strange he wouldn’t just say “girls…down the hill”. Probably been thinking way too much on this trial…but just crossed my mind. I still wonder sometimes if he knew they would be there. If he somehow knew them or at least one.

jmo
 
That’s a fascinating thought! Why anyone would walk across the bridge with their hands in their pockets has been pondered a lot. Maybe to hide what they’re wearing on their hands! Sure could be.
Regardless, it shows that he was very comfortable on that bridge.
 
Anyone else find it strange he wouldn’t just say “girls…down the hill”. Probably been thinking way too much on this trial…but just crossed my mind. I still wonder sometimes if he knew they would be there. If he somehow knew them or at least one.

jmo

Defense said "BG" said "Girls', down the hill," in their opening.
 
@Boxer saw it first. One of the bulges is shaped like a Sig P226.
View attachment 541256

View attachment 541253
sorry, that is not a pistol IMO. When someone puts a pistol in their pocket, they put the barrel into the pocket first and the butt last, so their hand can grip the pistol butt and pull the firearm from the pocket ready to use. In the photo of BG, the butt went first and the barrel last. Nobody pocket-carries like that, so whatever is in that pocket, it is not a pistol. JMO
 
Last edited:
Or he didn't do it in close contact with them.
Forcing them to undress is SA in and of itself but yes, we maybe only know what he didn't do. We don't know what he may have done. Touching. Staring. So many ways to violate a person. Barely teenaged girls.

We'll never know what DNA the creek may have destroyed either.

JMO
 
sorry, that is not a pistol IMO. When someone puts a pistol in their pocket, they put the barrel in to the pocket first and the butt last, so their hand can grip the pistol butt and pull the firearm from the pocket. In the photo of BG, the butt is put in first and the barrel last. Nobody pocket carries like that, so whatever is in that pocket, it is not a pistol. JMO

What if he already had it out briefly and hurriedly put it back in his pocket that way?
 
I'm saying the entire video has been played with. The BG is much further away from where the girls were when AW was seen running at the end of the bridge. Seconds later is when the audio that's been described as "down the hill" was "heard".

How did he get across the bridge so quickly to catch up to them?

Did he sprint across it? All I've heard is it's a trecherous bridge and you've gotta look down when moving across it.
That video is a mess imo.
 
sorry, that is not a pistol IMO. When someone puts a pistol in their pocket, they put the barrel into the pocket first and the butt last, so their hand can grip the pistol butt and pull the firearm from the pocket ready to go. In the photo of BG, the butt is first and the barrel last. Nobody pocket carries like that, so whatever is in that pocket, it is not a pistol. JMO
Does anybody know if the image of BG is oriented as was or mirrored left to right?

If BG intended only to use the gun for control, he may have threatened them with it in his non dominant hand in order to keep his dominant hand to restrain.

JMO
 
Except RA ironically didn't have THE phone that he said he using on the bridge that day when DD wrote the MEID number down. I'm sure RA was smart enough to bring a clean burner or older phone that had nothing incriminating on it just in case they did actually want to look at it.

Which brings us back to how many coincidences does it take to make it not a coincidence?

MOO
How many LE screw ups like not collecting the sticks for instance might it take for the jury to want to toss this case and RA out? I see points for and against both sides. It takes one juror to not back down in their conviction if they won’t go for guilty. Given how we debate here and we don’t see or hear what they do I imagine the jury room discussions will be quite interesting. Mooo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
998
Total visitors
1,161

Forum statistics

Threads
626,019
Messages
18,519,039
Members
240,919
Latest member
SleuthyBootsie
Back
Top