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

[AugustWest]

Let me see if I can find you another article.

@steeltowngirl First is a Scientific American article, second is a George Washington U. of Law journal article. Both are similar to the paywalled link.

Voice Analysis Should Be Used with Caution in Court

Although voice recognition is often presented as evidence in legal cases, its scientific basis can be shaky

www.scientificamerican.com

https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2409&context=faculty_publications

I apologize if they are blocked for you; I run a pretty good ad-blocker that usually gets through paywalls.

 

[tlcya]

No DNA on the green scarf. It seems some items were intentionally thrown in the creek to remove DNA. MOO

Delphi Murders trial: Day 9 live blog

Follow the trial of Richard Allen, accused of the Delphi murders, as it continues in the Carroll County Courthouse. Stay updated with WISH-TV's live blog.

www.wishtv.com

SMB - tlcya

whether by accident or design, any DNA on those items was not useable due to degradation caused by the exposure to water.

Degradation of biological evidence is most commonly caused by exposure to moisture and heat, which encourages the growth of bacteria. This can lead to the destruction of the DNA and the possibility of incomplete or no DNA typing results being obtained.
Evidence Handling Guidelines - Pure Gold Forensics.

 

[MassGuy]

That's a lot to take in.

I have no idea where to start in terms of proving it in a court of law.

JMO

It's not required to prove how planned or unplanned this was; merely that the elements of the charges are met.

It's pretty easy to use logic to reach a conclusion here.

Why did the killer come armed with a gun and knife? Probably because he planned to use it on a victim

Why is there no cell data when there should be? Because his phone was either not on his person, or turned off.

Why was this crime such high risk? Because the targets were ones of opportunity.

Why is there no DNA? Because a crime like this makes it inherently difficult to find DNA (didn't cut himself, left no semen, may have worn gloves, clothes found in water).

 

[smamda]

Wow. So you imagine this was all planned, but not necessarily targeting the girls in advance and that they were opportunistic?

And that's based upon the fact that no DNA was found, so he must have planned in advance?

Yes! That is what retired senior fbi profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole mentioned in the Down the Hill documentary. She believes the offender is local and familiar with the bridge. She thinks the location was chosen first, then the victims are chosen based on opportunity. This means the offender might not know the victims.

I posted about it last night, I'll link here..

Post in thread 'Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #205'

Oct 27, 2024

Sharing now because even though we've probably all seen this, I watched again last week it was a good reminder/visual of the trails and bridge. I watched on Max, but it's on other paid platforms as well.

Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders | TV Special | 2021

Watch Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders | Max

Watch Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders on Max. Plans start at $9.99/month. In 2017, the senseless murders of Abby Williams and Libby German left Delphi, Indiana, residents shaken. Four years later, investigators are still searching for the killer.

play.max.com

For those who cannot watch, here are my main takeaways.

• "The far-side of the bridge has no trail. The woods have taken over that part of the abandoned rail line, so the kids that walk the bridge to the far-end commonly discover that the excitement ends...

• smamda

• 
• 
• 

 

[Melted]

I told my story here before so I’ll make this one brief.

I am currently at I don’t know if he is guilty or not.

After hearing the states evidence, I definitely would vote for an acquittal but this can change with the upcoming confessions, I’ve had 2 psychotic breaks with reality in my life so I believe I’m able to understand what that means (unluckily). If his confessions are clear and concise and he does have knowledge ONLY the killer could know, my opinion would change to guilty.

If on the other hand his confessions consist of the ramblings of a man put in solitary confinement pretrial that is suffering psychosis admitting to killing his family, shooting the girls and even if he says he stabbed them. I am changing my stance from I don’t know to not guilty.

There are a plethora of studies of what solitary confinement does to a person, with it being (rightfully so) compared to torture.

I don’t know what he could possibly know that only the killer would know, but I’m going to assume it’s the box cutter confession, in which case then forensic pathologist didn’t testify to the fact that the girls were killed with a box cutter, he could only conclude they were killed with a blade.

We will find out this week I believe.

All JMO.

Edit: spelling

 

[Rosegold68]

That is true about sol confinement. I work in this area myself…. See men come in fine and watch mental health decline and spiral

Not a pretty sight, but I’ve seen it. Then the meds are messed about and it gets worse

 

[JenniD]

Disclaimer- my theory only!!
I think RA was involved in CSAM either on his own or maybe through his contact in Peru. I think he did go to the trails to meet up with the girls although they certainly were not expecting anyone like him. I think he might have brought the knives and gun as a protection for himself and not knowing what to expect. Something happened- he felt rejected and irate.. the rest is history

 

[MassGuy]

Yes! That is what retired senior fbi profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole mentioned in the Down the Hill documentary. She believes the offender is local and familiar with the bridge. She thinks the location was chosen first, then the victims are chosen based on opportunity. This means the offender might not know the victims.

I posted about it last night, I'll link here..

Post in thread 'Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #205'

Oct 27, 2024

Sharing now because even though we've probably all seen this, I watched again last week it was a good reminder/visual of the trails and bridge. I watched on Max, but it's on other paid platforms as well.

Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders | TV Special | 2021

Watch Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders | Max

Watch Down the Hill: The Delphi Murders on Max. Plans start at $9.99/month. In 2017, the senseless murders of Abby Williams and Libby German left Delphi, Indiana, residents shaken. Four years later, investigators are still searching for the killer.

play.max.com

For those who cannot watch, here are my main takeaways.

• "The far-side of the bridge has no trail. The woods have taken over that part of the abandoned rail line, so the kids that walk the bridge to the far-end commonly discover that the excitement ends...

• smamda

• 
• 
• 

Exactly. I simply can't make a targeted attack work based on these facts. Allen came prepared to kill, but he didn't know who it was he would be killing.

He didn't meet up with them; he stumbled upon them. They saw him coming, but it was too late.

 

[arielilane]

Has there been any evidence revealed of what's been found on RA's previous 20+ phones?
Ex: pictures of young girls, SA, etc.
Or was it determined RA's previous cell phone evidence is not admissible during trial?
TIA, moo

 

[steeltowngirl]

@steeltowngirl First is a Scientific American article, second is a George Washington U. of Law journal article. Both are similar to the paywalled link.

Voice Analysis Should Be Used with Caution in Court

Although voice recognition is often presented as evidence in legal cases, its scientific basis can be shaky

www.scientificamerican.com

https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2409&context=faculty_publications

I apologize if they are blocked for you; I run a pretty good ad-blocker that usually gets through paywalls.

Thank you @AugustWest !

 

[joe jones]

So no DNA ties to RA, but more evidence that Abby was naked at least from waist down as the underwear found in creek had her DNA on it, so at some point she was either redressed or dressed herself, I think she was redressed as just the lack of blood found on her body compared to Libby makes me think she was washed before being redressed in Libby's jeans,

 

[gremlin444]

So it could have been saliva?

I think I know what you are thinking of.

The problem is--we don't know which swab/location of sample she is referring to when she is talking about presumptive but not confirmed semen when you are then asking if it could be saliva.

There were a lot of swabs taken--of the girls bodies AND the clothing on Abby and the clothing in the water.

If the comment is referring to on Libby's body, it likely would have first been identified by an alternate light source (which we know they used from testimony on like day 2). If something lit up that wasn't detectable by the human eye, they are going to assume in order of likelihood 1) semen 2) saliva 3)sweat. And depending on what light they used, they can get an idea of what to test first: polilight (blood and semen), wood’s lamp, Bluemaxx, and UV light (saliva) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2468170920300357

Then they would have moved on to presumptive testing (there are some newer tests that let you test for both blood and semen at the same time) to try to narrow it down and then confirmative testing.

On the other hand, if that comment is referring to swabs taken of the underwear in the water: Delphi Murders trial: Day 9 live blog

"On the pair of underwear found in the creek, she tells the jury there was no blood or seminal fluid found. Bozinovski told the jury that she took swabs from the crotch area. Those swabs showed Abby’s DNA. The tells the jury the underwear were stained, but not by blood."

So, if they do the acid phosphatase presumptive testing on the crotch of the underwear and it comes up positive, the problem is that:
"Other body fluids can contain other forms of acid phosphatases that may give a false positive reaction such as vaginal fluid (vaginal acid phosphatase is elevated in prepubescent females)."

https://www.jonathanrooker.com/understanding-serology-and-biological-evidencecriminal-defense-and-dna--fresno-ca

The Identification of Body Fluids in Sexual Assault Cases

We explore the examination of exhibits for scientists to recover evidence of human contact to uncover DNA evidence from physical touching and bodily fluids.

www.forensic-access.co.uk

So they would then do a consumptive test--which would definitively rule out semen.

I haven't seen any account of the DNA expert testimony from today where she mentions the presence of saliva--but the news media would tend to focus on the blood and semen aspect so is it a matter of they didn't put it in their reports or the expert didn't say anything about it. I'm sure that once we get to see accounts of the cross examining by the defense, we'll know if saliva was present or not because they will certainly ask about it if it was not specifically mentioned as being ruled out.

 

[FromGermany1]

If this was all planned then his getaway plan was rubbish! He parked too far away…..and in sight of too many people

Surely if planned he would have parked better?

I think, the parking was well planned as he wouldn't have been trapped in a narrow parking space like at the trail head or the cemetery. BUT he was too stupid, it seems, (thank God) to change or put off his bloody jacket. MOO

 

[Rosegold68]

Disclaimer- my theory only!!
I think RA was involved in CSAM either on his own or maybe through his contact in Peru. I think he did go to the trails to meet up with the girls although they certainly were not expecting anyone like him. I think he might have brought the knives and gun as a protection for himself and not knowing what to expect. Something happened- he felt rejected and irate.. the rest is history

This is very believable!

 

[joe jones]

Has there been any evidence revealed of what's been found on RA's previous 20+ phones?
Ex: pictures of young girls, SA, etc.
Or was it determined RA's previous cell phone evidence is not admissible during trial?
TIA, moo

I would hope they have examined all his seized devices and nothing has been testified about anything found on phones, and he has no other charges except those relating to the murders, so I don't think they found anything, they have mentioned that on a device (I'm not sure what device) that was seized somebody in that house has done searches relating to murders, don't know if what timeframe murder searches were as it's hard to find all the details from court

 

[Bergmann]

I think I know what you are thinking of.

The problem is--we don't know which swab/location of sample she is referring to when she is talking about presumptive but not confirmed semen when you are then asking if it could be saliva.

There were a lot of swabs taken--of the girls bodies AND the clothing on Abby and the clothing in the water.

If the comment is referring to on Libby's body, it likely would have first been identified by an alternate light source (which we know they used from testimony on like day 2). If something lit up that wasn't detectable by the human eye, they are going to assume in order of likelihood 1) semen 2) saliva 3)sweat. And depending on what light they used, they can get an idea of what to test first: polilight (blood and semen), wood’s lamp, Bluemaxx, and UV light (saliva) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2468170920300357

Then they would have moved on to presumptive testing (there are some newer tests that let you test for both blood and semen at the same time) to try to narrow it down and then confirmative testing.

On the other hand, if that comment is referring to swabs taken of the underwear in the water: Delphi Murders trial: Day 9 live blog

"On the pair of underwear found in the creek, she tells the jury there was no blood or seminal fluid found. Bozinovski told the jury that she took swabs from the crotch area. Those swabs showed Abby’s DNA. The tells the jury the underwear were stained, but not by blood."

So, if they do the acid phosphatase presumptive testing on the crotch of the underwear and it comes up positive, the problem is that:
"Other body fluids can contain other forms of acid phosphatases that may give a false positive reaction such as vaginal fluid (vaginal acid phosphatase is elevated in prepubescent females)."

https://www.jonathanrooker.com/understanding-serology-and-biological-evidencecriminal-defense-and-dna--fresno-ca

The Identification of Body Fluids in Sexual Assault Cases

We explore the examination of exhibits for scientists to recover evidence of human contact to uncover DNA evidence from physical touching and bodily fluids.

www.forensic-access.co.uk

So they would then do a consumptive test--which would definitively rule out semen.

I haven't seen any account of the DNA expert testimony from today where she mentions the presence of saliva--but the news media would tend to focus on the blood and semen aspect so is it a matter of they didn't put it in their reports or the expert didn't say anything about it. I'm sure that once we get to see accounts of the cross examining by the defense, we'll know if saliva was present or not because they will certainly ask about it if it was not specifically mentioned as being ruled out.

Good post!

Follow the evidence .

 

[shonyakay]

So no DNA ties to RA, but more evidence that Abby was naked at least from waist down as the underwear found in creek had her DNA on it, so at some point she was either redressed or dressed herself, I think she was redressed as just the lack of blood found on her body compared to Libby makes me think she was washed before being redressed in Libby's jeans,

I think the evidence shows Abby was redressed before her fatal injury. Now whether she put those clothes on herself, or not, I am not sure.

 

[flashy09]

I would hope they have examined all his seized devices and nothing has been testified about anything found on phones, and he has no other charges except those relating to the murders, so I don't think they found anything, they have mentioned that on a device (I'm not sure what device) that was seized somebody in that house has done searches relating to murders, don't know if what timeframe murder searches were as it's hard to find all the details from court

Well, he is missing his 2017 phone. Maybe just a coincidence that he seems to save his most all of his old phones, iPads, etc, but that one is gone. Kind of reminds me of KK microwaving one of his phones.

 

[joe jones]

Why would he of kept anything?

He knew he had been seen and then that video comes out so he knews he has to get rid of anything incriminating.

Kept the car state says he drove. home in, states witness says he looked like he had slaughtered an animal, so his car would have loads of blood in it, he could have (if one believes states witness) cleaned up noticeable blood but DNA lingers for years, and he would have both Abby and Libby DNA in was quantity in his car, again reliant on one believing states witness,

 

[fred&edna]

I will apologize right now as this has likely been answered many times in earlier threads but I cannot remember the answer. LE mentioned a backpack when these murders occurred. What happened to the backpack? Was it first believed the girls might have had one but actually they didn't? OR was the killer believed to be carrying a backpack? My mind is no steel trap but I distinctly remember a backpack was mentioned by LE. No, I don't believe this backpack has anything to do with the case nor the trial... but I would love additional info if anyone remembers. (It's the little things that stick with me, sometimes) TIA!