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

[gremlin444]

I do not know, but I think? JG ruled no geofencing evidence would be admissible in this trial? I recall it was something the STATE wanted omitted which this link confirms: Delphi defense points to new cellphone data in murders

https://www.wane.com/top-stories/delphi-tip-marked-cleared-found-while-cleaning-out-desk-put-richard-allen-on-the-radar-in-2022/

"While Allen said he was looking at his phone’s stock ticker while on the trail, the defense pointed out that no digital data links Allen to the trails.

“That’s what’s interesting. He says he was on the phone but there’s no evidence of that either,” Liggett said on the stand." '

So, in that quote you have both LE and the defense team talking about no evidence of the phone at the trails.

 

[SouthEnd]

https://www.wane.com/top-stories/delphi-tip-marked-cleared-found-while-cleaning-out-desk-put-richard-allen-on-the-radar-in-2022/

"While Allen said he was looking at his phone’s stock ticker while on the trail, the defense pointed out that no digital data links Allen to the trails.

“That’s what’s interesting. He says he was on the phone but there’s no evidence of that either,” Liggett said on the stand." '

Correct. Additionally, the ruling re: Geofencing wasn't that none would be used, but that if used, it needed to be relevant. (moo is that the ruling is such, to avoid pulling in random ppl in the vicinity that have already been cleared, while still exploring RA phone's presence or lack thereof).

MOO

 

[Melted]

https://www.wane.com/top-stories/he-was-covered-in-mud-and-blood-bridge-guy-witness-testimonies-continue/

"Cecil’s deeper analysis in 2019 also was able to access the KnowledgeC database, which logs all kinds of user data from when a phone is turned on or off to when the screen lights up to when apps are used and how they’re used.

The forensic examiners didn’t know the KnowledgeC database existed in 2017 during the first phone extraction analysis."

I appreciate it.

I’m very curious to hear these confessions and then hear the defense. This trial seems like a dog fight so far.

JMO

I know there are a lot of people who are convinced of RA’s guilt in here and I believe that the worst possible outcome of this trial would be RA walking IF he is in fact guilty, which I believe whether we like it or not there is a serious chance of.

I just hope that if he is guilty, his confessions are clear as day and that he is convicted and if he is innocent the defense can make that extremely clear in their case and he is acquitted.

Basically I hope there is no doubt about the verdict when it’s read.

JMO

Edit: grammar

 

[MassGuy]

I suppose that makes finding the exact gun it was cycled through just as unrealistic then. MOoooo.

Well not if you have the actual gun. The examiner concluded it was a match, that the round found at the scene was in fact cycled through Richard Allen's firearm specifically.

It comes down to if the jury is convinced the process she used is as accurate as she claimed.

 

[seestr8]

I have a question that might have been answered and actually presented in court even, what was the height of bridge guy from the down the hill video, I understand the actual video is at times upside down, extremely shaky and whatnot but surely the fbi or some tech company could work it out

Per Andrea Burkhart, the State wasn’t willing to pay the $10,000 fee to analyze BG’s height from Libby’s cell phone recording, and the FBI poster was based on eyewitness reports of BG, which varied by quite a bit.

Edit: accidentally responded to wrong post before. Sorry!!

 

[SouthEnd]

I appreciate it.

I’m very curious to hear these confessions and then hear the defense. This trial seems like a dog fight so far.

JMO

I know there are a lot of people who are convinced of RA’s guilt in here and I believe that the worst possible outcome of this trial would be RA walking IF he is in fact guilty, which I believe whether we like it or not there is a serious chance of.

I just hope that if he is guilty, his confessions are clear as day and that he is convicted and if he is innocent the defense can make that extremely clear in their case and he is acquitted.

Basically I hope there is no doubt about the verdict when it’s read.

JMO

Edit: grammar

Appreciate your words.

What is frustrating to me, is that going through tool mark analysis, through data extractions, timeline analysis, through the method of elimination... Poorly on data, with no confessions but with the admissions of RA pre-arrest I personally believe BARD that RA is guilty. HOWEVER I have the benefit of being chronically online. I have the internet, I can read journals on tool mark analysis and watch/listen to hours of how it is done on youtube, and the cases in which it could be inaccurate. It is being able to poke at the data presented myself, which makes me comfortable to say BARD.

My concern is, will the few days of experts droning in a courtroom be enough to get the jurors to understand data and believe in them BARD?

Just MOO

 

[INfisherman]

I appreciate it.

I’m very curious to hear these confessions and then hear the defense. This trial seems like a dog fight so far.

JMO

I know there are a lot of people who are convinced of RA’s guilt in here and I believe that the worst possible outcome of this trial would be RA walking IF he is in fact guilty, which I believe whether we like it or not there is a serious chance of.

I just hope that if he is guilty, his confessions are clear as day and that he is convicted and if he is innocent the defense can make that extremely clear in their case and he is acquitted.

Basically I hope there is no doubt about the verdict when it’s read.

JMO

Edit: grammar

I wish it were going to be that way (when the verdict is read) but IMO too many questions remain unanswered for there to be no doubt, regardless of what the verdict might be. Very tough case & the 6 year lapse & sideshows that went on prior to the trial didn’t help much either.

 

[MassGuy]

Appreciate your words.

What is frustrating to me, is that going through tool mark analysis, through data extractions, timeline analysis, through the method of elimination... Poorly on data, with no confessions but with the admissions of RA pre-arrest I personally believe BARD that RA is guilty. HOWEVER I have the benefit of being chronically online. I have the internet, I can read journals on tool mark analysis and watch/listen to hours of how it is done on youtube, and the cases in which it could be inaccurate. It is being able to poke at the data presented myself, which makes me comfortable to say BARD.

My concern is, will the few days of experts droning in a courtroom be enough to get the jurors to understand data and believe in them BARD?

Just MOO

If they believe the confessions, then they will believe the rest of it.

Big week!

 

[KentuckyMama]

I thought I heard that the ME or pathologist, whoever did the autopsies, stated the time of death was 41 hours earlier. I was looking for it because one poster has stated a few times now they are surprised there is no time of death. Did I dream this?

 

[MassGuy]

I thought I heard that the ME or pathologist, whoever did the autopsies, stated the time of death was 41 hours earlier. I was looking for it because one poster has stated a few times now they are surprised there is no time of death. Did I dream this?

No you didn’t. I remember that because we were trying to figure out what time that was based on when the autopsy was performed.

I figured if the autopsy was performed at 8am, which I’ve seen in some timelines, then the girls died around 3pm.

 

[SouthEnd]

I thought I heard that the ME or pathologist, whoever did the autopsies, stated the time of death was 41 hours earlier. I was looking for it because one poster has stated a few times now they are surprised there is no time of death. Did I dream this?

Delphi Murders Trial: Day 5 live blog

Wednesday is day 5 of testimonies in the Delphi Murders trial begins at the Carroll County courthouse. Follow our live blog for updates.

www.wishtv.com

RSBM
Kohr estimated that the girls died approximately 41 hours before the autopsy.

It is 41 hours prior the autopsy, correct.

IMO the D kept mentioning 'there is no EXACT time of death' because, as is the norm, Dr Kohr said 'approximately', and that's how the idea that there was no time of death got perpetuated.

 

[INfisherman]

Per Andrea Burkhart, the State wasn’t willing to pay the $10,000 fee to analyze BG’s height from Libby’s cell phone recording, and the FBI poster was based on eyewitness reports of BG, which varied by quite a bit.

Edit: accidentally responded to wrong post before. Sorry!!

The state was willing to pony up $4m for the trial alone but it was unwilling to pony up $10k? That makes perfect sense IMO.

 

[KentuckyMama]

Delphi Murders Trial: Day 5 live blog

Wednesday is day 5 of testimonies in the Delphi Murders trial begins at the Carroll County courthouse. Follow our live blog for updates.

www.wishtv.com

RSBM
Kohr estimated that the girls died approximately 41 hours before the autopsy.

It is 41 hours prior the autopsy, correct.

IMO the D kept mentioning 'there is no EXACT time of death' because, as is the norm, Dr Kohr said 'approximately', and that's how the idea that there was no time of death got perpetuated.

Thank you! Was starting to think you really did dream it. It annoys me to no end the amount of confusion and twisting of words and outright lies in this case. It seems noticeably more than any other case I've followed. Thank you again for finding the article.

 

[shonyakay]

I do agree that all of the witnesses have different "descriptions" of the man they saw but this doesn't phase me in the least and I will explain why.

1. Witness statements are often not rock solid. So it is crucial to have actual evidence (a nexus) that links someone to the crime/crime scene, not just someone's word for it. A nexus in regards to RA is the unspent round that was cycled through his gun, according to an expert.

2 All of the witnesses in this case were unaware that a crime was in process at the time they seen the suspect.

3. All of the witnesses saw what they seen for very brief periods of time.

4. All of the witnesses have different descriptions of the man but the timeline proves they all saw the same man "BG."

5. A car similar to RA's car is seen on the HHS's camera going eastbound at 1:27 p.m. headed in the direction of the old CPS building.

6. RA's own admissions.
RA told the interviewing officer in 2022 that he passed by the Mears' farm entrance when he arrived at the trails. In 2017, Dulin said RA said he parked by a building, walked to Freedom Bridge, and was on the trails from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
In 2022 RA changed the time of his arrival and depature from the trails. A group of juvenile girls' saw "BG" in the vicinity of Freedom Bridge shortly after 1:30 p.m. They also walked the entirety of the trail and saw no other male. In 2017 and 2022, RA says he passed by some juvenile girls in the vicinity of the Freedom Bridge. In 2022 RA described himself as wearing similar attire to what the witnesses described of "BG." RA also says he walked out to platform 1 on the bridge and a witness places "BG" on that same platform shortly after 1:46 p.m. Shortly after 1:49 p.m. the witness who observed "BG" on the platform passes Libby and Abby heading to the High Bridge and "BG." That witness made several walk-throughs from the High Bridge to the Freedom Bridge and back and saw no other male
At 2:13 p.m. Libby records a man in similar attire as "BG" on the bridge and he is heading toward them. "BG" abducts Libby and Abby from the bridge.

 

[Melted]

Appreciate your words.

What is frustrating to me, is that going through tool mark analysis, through data extractions, timeline analysis, through the method of elimination... Poorly on data, with no confessions but with the admissions of RA pre-arrest I personally believe BARD that RA is guilty. HOWEVER I have the benefit of being chronically online. I have the internet, I can read journals on tool mark analysis and watch/listen to hours of how it is done on youtube, and the cases in which it could be inaccurate. It is being able to poke at the data presented myself, which makes me comfortable to say BARD.

My concern is, will the few days of experts droning in a courtroom be enough to get the jurors to understand data and believe in them BARD?

Just MOO

It is very very hard to put yourself in the jury’s shoes I agree.

I won’t speak for you but I know for myself I’ve followed every rabbit hole on this case since 2017, it’s honestly the only “true crime” case I’ve paid attention to and will admit at times it’s almost been obsessive.

The jury is going in as blank slates for the most part aside from possibly seeing quick news updates about the case.

JMO

 

[MassGuy]

Thank you! Was starting to think you really did dream it. It annoys me to no end the amount of confusion and twisting of words and outright lies in this case. It seems noticeably more than any other case I've followed. Thank you again for finding the article.

It’s more than any other case because we are not used to this level of restrictions placed upon the media.

If we don’t have cameras, we have audio. If we don’t have audio we have reporters we can rely on to live blog the proceedings.

We’ve got none of that here, and we’re forced to rely on small amounts of information that is designed to paint a picture in broad strokes.

If we want long-form stuff, then we have to rely on YouTubers. That comes with it's own issues.

MASSGUY DOESN’T DO YOUTUBE!

 

[INfisherman]

DBM - after thinking more about it.

 

[snooptroop88]

https://www.wane.com/top-stories/delphi-tip-marked-cleared-found-while-cleaning-out-desk-put-richard-allen-on-the-radar-in-2022/

"While Allen said he was looking at his phone’s stock ticker while on the trail, the defense pointed out that no digital data links Allen to the trails.

“That’s what’s interesting. He says he was on the phone but there’s no evidence of that either,” Liggett said on the stand." '

So, in that quote you have both LE and the defense team talking about no evidence of the phone at the trails.

I know others may think I'm overestimating the importance of this no phone on the trails point, but if I were on the jury, I'd convict him on the spot with that piece of information in conjunction with the totality of the evidence.

In theory, what you'd have is a murderer that went to a conservation officer & arranged to have his meeting in the grocery store parking lot when the situation generally was in chaos. The murderer implies he had his phone on the trails (note he doesn't even use the actual word "phone"), subtly implying his trustworthiness and everyday reliability and trackability-- "nothing to see here". The conservation officer takes the report, and without even thinking about it consciously, that officer probably knows that if this individual's telling the truth about the phone, well, he'd appear on the geofence or through some tracking data later. But the murderer lied. If so, likely on purpose, moo. Perhaps he also misstated his name in a confusing manner-- on purpose. Perhaps the grocery store as designated meeting place was on purpose. Maybe going to a conservation officer instead of a sheriff was on purpose. And now he does not appear on the geofence, and his unrecorded interview with the conservation officer drifts away. And he figures he is safe, he made it past LE. It's "over." The murderer can reassure anyone concerned that hey, whatever about the sketches, he already talked with LE.

But then LE shows up later at RA's door. And then, it's really "all over." There's Odinites, there's desperate reversals of timeines, back-and-forth confessions, but let me tell you, RA knows it's over nonetheless.

NOT saying this is the way it went down yet. But I'm watching to see if that phone pinged off a tower. If no phone ping, I'd convict him without hesitation. And if he's that slick, this probably wasn't his first venture. Maybe he was fortunate and more careful before. Maybe he unraveled and reached the end of his murderous "death cycle," All MOO, but if there's no ping off that tower, I'd convict RA without any hesitation whatsoever, jmo.

 

[fred&edna]

I do not know, but I think? JG ruled no geofencing evidence would be admissible in this trial? I recall it was something the STATE wanted omitted which this link confirms: Delphi defense points to new cellphone data in murders

Hmmm.... interesting. Was this motion approved? If so, I wonder if further information regarding cell data will be discussed at all??

Geofencing information from Allen’s phone and other persons’ phones is also mentioned in the motion, with prosecutors wanting to restrict the defense from using this information at trial. Prosecutors argue the information has the potential the confuse jurors and want it kept out of the trial.

Delphi murders: Prosecution seeking restrictions on defense's case

Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland, the prosecutor in the Delphi murders case have asked the court to restrict the defense team from mentioning key elements in their argument to the jury.

www.wishtv.com

 

[Melted]

I know others may think I'm overestimating the importance of this no phone on the trails point, but if I were on the jury, I'd convict him on the spot with that piece of information in conjunction with the totality of the evidence.

In theory, what you'd have is a murderer that went to a conservation officer & arranged to have his meeting in the grocery store parking lot when the situation generally was in chaos. The murderer implies he had his phone on the trails (note he doesn't even use the actual word "phone"), subtly implying his trustworthiness and everyday reliability and trackability-- "nothing to see here". The conservation officer takes the report, and without even thinking about it consciously, that officer probably knows that if this individual's telling the truth about the phone, well, he'd appear on the geofence or through some tracking data later. But the murderer lied. If so, likely on purpose, moo. Perhaps he also misstated his name in a confusing manner-- on purpose. Perhaps the grocery store as designated meeting place was on purpose. Maybe going to a conservation officer instead of a sheriff was on purpose. And now he does not appear on the geofence, and his unrecorded interview with the conservation officer drifts away. And he figures he is safe, he made it past LE. It's "over." The murderer can reassure anyone concerned that hey, whatever about the sketches, he already talked with LE.

But then LE shows up later at RA's door. And then, it's really "all over." There's Odinites, there's desperate reversals of timeines, back-and-forth confessions, but let me tell you, RA knows it's over nonetheless.

NOT saying this is the way it went down yet. But I'm watching to see if that phone pinged off a tower. If no phone ping, I'd convict him without hesitation. And if he's that slick, this probably wasn't his first venture. Maybe he was fortunate and more careful before. Maybe he unraveled and reached the end of his murderous "death cycle," All MOO, but if there's no ping off that tower, I'd convict RA without any hesitation whatsoever, jmo.

I believe I read that Richard Allen handed his phone over to officer Dullin and that’s how he retrieved his IMEI.