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

[girlhasnoname]

you’re not on the jury though.

No I am not, as you yourself are not. I'm going by various reporting sources. I think there is a good reason AB does a lot of the interaction, especially with the jury.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

‘99% who expressed a preference said their cats preferred it’.

You can only interpret a result by looking at the sample.

Oh I know. I recall a MSM during the Gulf War claiming Iraqis didn’t want US troops over there based in a survey of 1200 Iraqis. Iraq had a population over 25 million at the time. I defer to Mark Twain’s famous quote concerning statistics.

 

[sunshineray]

Rozzi doesn't impress me much, he seems to take his vigorous defense of his client a step too far...right into the bullying stage. Kind of like how some people think LE bullied RA.

JMO

He's seems to like the angry approach to cross examination. I've heard he's put his foot in his mouth a few times, probably because of that demeanor. Different people in the courtroom have noticed it. Probably better for the defense to use AB more. MO

 

[sunshineray]

you’re not on the jury though.

He may wind up like sandpaper to some on the jury. MO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Will definitely be interesting to see if the masses voting as guilty were right all along. I’m honestly surprised so few votes going for NG. Will be interesting to see if the percentages shift noticeably as D gets their turn.

I’m still on the fence. I see a ton of coincidences going against RA but I was honestly hoping for more from the state. Jurors can be difficult to predict. I’ve seen convictions here in IN allegedly based on much less but I could be mistaken, as I didn’t follow those cases as closely. I’m interested to see what the D does when the ball is in their court.

I am guessing the numbers will skew during the Defense's case in their favor, that's not unusual.

I can only imagine what the D might pull during their case. They have shown they skate outside of the Court Ordered lines, so I feel like it will be a contentious presentation and NMcL and Company will be objecting quite a bit. Which truthfully, is exactly what I think the D wants.

At the end of the day, the jury will decide based on the totality of all evidence presented. I'm good with that and I still firmly believe RA will be found guilty.

Of course that is MOO

 

[sunshineray]

Apologies - I followed others leads when others in that list were repeatedly mentioned. I’ll stay away from it then. Thanks.

No worries, I just figured you didn't know about it.

 

[girlhasnoname]

My 02c here is everyone knows the trade off in police interviews in America. David Simon popularised it in his famous book Homicide and the TV show about murder investigations where it was a running theme of breaking people in the tank. My reason to say this is most every American knows not to talk to police in these situations!

Since Miranda, you have a complete right to silence. And that means you have no real incentive to speak. So police are left with trickery, deception, psychology etc because all suspects should say nothing. In my country, the tradeoff is different. There are advantages to disclosure but LE is required to also disclose. No lying.

AB knows this of course. I agree with her that it's dumb and bad, but it's the rules American courts have decided upon.

Rick should have kept quiet. Instead he said stupid things in 2 interviews which incriminate him. Were the police mean? Sure. Such is life.

Don't talk to police.

MOO

Especially when your guilty.

 

[sunshineray]

Oh I know. I recall a MSM during the Gulf War claiming Iraqis didn’t want US troops over there based in a survey of 1200 Iraqis. Iraq had a population over 25 million at the time. I defer to Mark Twain’s famous quote concerning statistics.

"There are three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies and statistics." And Twain said it was Disraeli's quote lol

 

[INfisherman]

I am guessing the numbers will skew during the Defense's case in their favor, that's not unusual.

I can only imagine what the D might pull during their case. They have shown they skate outside of the Court Ordered lines, so I feel like it will be a contentious presentation and NMcL and Company will be objecting quite a bit. Which truthfully, is exactly what I think the D wants.

At the end of the day, the jury will decide based on the totality of all evidence presented. I'm good with that and I still firmly believe RA will be found guilty.

Of course that is MOO

Yes, the needle will move based on who wins the day, so to speak. Logical assumption.

I’m sure the D’s approach will be more of the same. I would not be a good juror as I would be swayed by how counsel treated witnesses & pretending to be melodramatic in a lame attempt at hitting juror’s emotions would cause me to not pay as much attention to them. I have very strong feelings/opinions concerning the D, however those have little bearing so I try to avoid bringing any of that up.

I feel that if the jury is more traditional rural IN makeup, he’ll more than likely be found guilty. If there’s a mix of that with younger suburban hipsters, more than likely a hung jury. I honestly don’t know at this point.

I’d have much stronger feelings towards guilt if there were more evidence or way of closing off the east side of the bridge with a witness, but as was stated, we have what we have.

 

[sunshineray]

My 02c here is everyone knows the trade off in police interviews in America. David Simon popularised it in his famous book Homicide and the TV show about murder investigations where it was a running theme of breaking people in the tank. My reason to say this is most every American knows not to talk to police in these situations!

Since Miranda, you have a complete right to silence. And that means you have no real incentive to speak. So police are left with trickery, deception, psychology etc because all suspects should say nothing. In my country, the tradeoff is different. There are advantages to disclosure but LE is required to also disclose. No lying.

AB knows this of course. I agree with her that it's dumb and bad, but it's the rules American courts have decided upon.

Rick should have kept quiet. Instead he said stupid things in 2 interviews which incriminate him. Were the police mean? Sure. Such is life.

Don't talk to police.

MOO

And he advised his wife to get a lawyer but not himself. Very odd.

 

[INfisherman]

No worries, I just figured you didn't know about it.

I knew, just followed leads of other posts when a deceased landowner’s initials were used along with a man with Odinism ties who was from N IN & essentially tied to the case through FB posts & his son/stepson allegedly had ties to one of the victims. Other forums to which I’ve belonged have riles, just not a strict. Don’t get me wrong, I understand the obvious if folks were making vetted folks out to be the murdered but just don’t see the logic in discussing people who were linked to the case & deleted possible,vital evidence, particularly when the case map has the deceased’s name on it, but not anything worth debating. I simply find the events prior to the murders & the potential to link to fat boy fascinating.

 

[FrostedGlass]

I agree, the "science" is nonsense.

It's nothing more than an opinion. Was the main point.

Looking forward to the D's expert on the bullet.

Me, too. I wonder how many of metallurgist Tobin's papers he's read. Will he find a way to introduce any of that info into his testimony?

 

[Boxer]

Why would anyone who carried a handgun when out hiking only have one bullet in it?
Doesn't make sense.

 

[INfisherman]

"There are three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies and statistics." And Twain said it was Disraeli's quote lol

That’s the one & I wasn’t sure if Twain had borrowed it or not. I’m done with fact checking things for a bit - taking up too much of my time;

 

[00stevenm]

They are going to have to change their timeline midstream on where the car was parked. Wild misses by the state.

 

[INfisherman]

Why would anyone who carried a handgun when out hiking only have one bullet in it?
Doesn't make sense.

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

 

[Bergmann]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>


This is of course generally speaking and IMO one of the problems with expert testimony. Unless it presents an overwhelming and irrefutable conclusion then it’s always going to be open to discussion interpretation and selective validity.

I’d expect the defenses expert to spend a lot of time trying to undermine the states expert but given they are from the same field I would also expect they’ll reach the same conclusions* and then it’s about who the jury find more compelling.

* Conclusions from the states own expert being
1. Ejected cartridges did not leave sufficient impressions for positive identification (!)

2. When comparing ejected cartridge and fired cartridge casings the one found at scene could have come from RA’s gun

3. The cartridge found could have been cycled through a different gun, and other guns cannot be excluded

From a tactical point of view I can’t imagine the defence wanting to do anything else except reinforce the implications of these findings.

Actually come to think of it the obvious thing to attack is the flaws in the methodology.

All JMO

 

[INfisherman]

Me, too. I wonder how many of metallurgist Tobin's papers he's read. Will he find a way to introduce any of that info into his testimony?

Is the witness a ballistics expert or a metallurgist? I doubt both. If the P is worth a salt, he would trend that way during cross. However that I am aware, the state did leave opportunities on the table with past witnesses, IMO.

BTW, do you know if RA had military training? I seem to recall reading somewhere he was in the guard at one time & had kept his hair short since then. Am I mistaken? This might lead back to our further musings on the escape.

 

[rez125]

They are going to have to change their timeline midstream on where the car was parked. Wild misses by the state.

The defense pointed this out in their opening.

"Remember what the state has said because at some point it will have to change. They're going to change their story right in front of your eyes".

Per AM on DD tonight.

 

[girlhasnoname]

They are going to have to change their timeline midstream on where the car was parked. Wild misses by the state.

Why? I think the State's timeline works out exactly to the information RA himself gave about being on the trails from 1:30 to 3:30. These are approximate times not down to the exact minute and seconds and testified to by witnesses and video.

MOO