Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #206

[StarryStarryNight]

I think if you’re coming at it from a the prosecution hasn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt RA did it, and not that’s he’s necessarily innocent just unproven you’d point out

-One witness identified a bloody and muddy man wearing different clothes than RA
-One witness said they saw a younger guy out there that day around the time of the murders

Those two things alone I don’t think it would be unreasonable for a juror to think there could have been at least three men walking around during that time, and who knows maybe there were some not seen

-The bullet was from a Sauer 226, but they can’t confirm it is from RA’s 226, how many other people own that model of gun, when they first bring this evidence about the bullet up you’re thinking it’s the smoking gun but then let down when it could be someone else’s gun

-LE fumbled the investigation and could have followed up right away on RA and potentially missed out on collecting crucial evidence such as his phone

-Prosecution has not shown that bridge guy committed the murders, there is a non zero chance that bridge guy is just somebody who happened to be in this grainy video and someone else besides bridge guy committed the crimes, there is no dna no nothing at the crime scene to analyze and link bridge guy to the murderer

I’m not going to say there isn’t circumstantial evidence against RA, but jurors don’t get to constantly analyze, talk through, speculate like the public does

We must be watching two different trials.

To me, all the witnesses are credible. Perfect, no….but perfectly credible. In my opinion, the contention that SC said muddy and bloody was wearing different clothes and that BB claimed to see a younger man, that the cartridge does not match RA’s particular gun, are taken out of context to push a particular narrative.
LE did mess up at times, and honestly, there are a couple I don’t particularly care for, but that doesn’t negate any of the evidence stacking against RA, and I don’t think they are dishonest.
Lack of DNA means nothing in a case 5+ years old at the arrest. It sure didn’t surprise me none was found. Thousands and thousands of guilty people were convicted before DNA was used. This is a circumstantial case.
The prosecution’s case isn’t over yet. Remember the 60+ confessions.

Why does no one ever point out that RA said he was on the first platform, at the exact same time BB said she saw a man there dressed like BG. How does anybody explain that? At the same time Libby and Abby were just heading down the trail toward the bridge. This is the nexus. RA, in his on words, BB as witness, Abby and Libby as victims, BG on Libby’s camera, all converge at MHB. These are the only people there at that time.

As always, just my opinion

 

[Ursamajr]

DNA is circumstantial evidence.

"DNA evidence constitutes circumstantial evidence used to identify the perpetrator of a serious crime by comparing the DNA profile of a suspect with the DNA profile of a bodily substance found at the crime scene or on or in something associated with the crime. It can provide compelling evidence linking a suspect to the crime. It is not in itself proof of guilt."

FPT HEADS OF PROSECUTIONS COMMITTEE REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON THE PREVENTION OF MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE

Department of Justice Canada's Internet site

www.justice.gc.ca

Ok got ya, thanks. Frustrating to say the least but necessary since wrongful convictions unfortunately do happen.

Can I change my wording to: I just want a direct link between RA and the girls - DNA would be nice. Something that the jury (and the general public) are going to have a real difficult time disregarding.

 

[flashy09]

Yes it does but his recorded interview tells a different story. I'll believe what he actually said.

https://fox59.com/delphi-trial/arrest-me-or-take-me-home-jury-watches-video-richard-allens-first-interview/

He "believes" he was wearing a black jacket, but said he had a blue and black one at the time.

Same interview he changes his 1:30 - 3:30 timeline given when his memory was fresh. Now he said he left around 1:30 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. but "forgot the timing really."

 

[arielilane]

And so far... it seems they really didn't find anything to tie him to the murders - unless the state has some bombshell they're gonna drop before they rest? Mooo.

Perhaps a bombshell... it's needed. I believe RA committed the heinous crime, but it doesnt matter what I think... it is more important what the evidence shows and what the jurors vote. More evidence is needed, though.

Transparency is much needed in the courtroom. It's been a bit hard to follow since the trial is not live streamed. My understanding is that the courts work for the people not that the people work for the courts, but its my opinion, only.

Thank goodness Libby had a sixth sense something wasn't right and started recording.

Abby & Libby true crime angels, watching over young victims.

Just my opinion its important that the public know what happened to these young girls. They never made it to high school due to a mad person.

moo

 

[Melted]

Do you genuinely believe they’d spend years chasing their tails, extensively investigating numerous people, if they actually knew they had this misfiled piece of paper?

That makes zero sense, and is wholly refuted by the facts.

That statement was in fact misfiled, with his name transposed with his address.

Kathy Shank explained on the stand, exactly how she found it, and what came next.

This delay brought them back to a place that they should have been all along. This conspiracy stuff is baseless and gets us nowhere.

A bit off topic but there was a strange 3 year lapse between when they found all of that CSAM on KK’s devices and arrested him, there was definitely a lot going on behind this investigation we are not yet privy to.

JMO

 

[MassGuy]

I've not put much thought into whether RA could accomplish it all by himself, but to be fair he is what 5'4", not trim at the time, and had a heart attack and stents put in at some point before the murders

Two much younger girls and a gun. It does appear they may not have cooperated at a time (I think it was when he made them undress), which is why he racked his gun.

No need to do that with another person to help, and you’re highly unlikely to have two offenders with the same MO.

That’s also double the chance to leave DNA, which didn’t happen.

This crime scene looks to me like one man did it, from the similarity of the wounds to the fact that Libby appears to have had the opportunity to escape a short distance.

Plus there are lots of other issues.

 

[Ursamajr]

We must be watching two different trials.

(snipped by me)

This is the problem. None of us are watching the actual trial. We are just getting reports from reporters or youtubers who all have their own biases. It's really fascinating how different the opinions are depending on how and from whom you're consuming the info.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Ok got ya, thanks. Frustrating to say the least but necessary since wrongful convictions unfortunately do happen.

Can I change my wording to: I just want a direct link between RA and the girls - DNA would be nice. Something that the jury (and the general public) are going to have a real difficult time disregarding.

I doubt that. Circumstantial evidence carries the same weight as direct evidence and has for centuries.
Those kind of cases still happen today.

Opinion

 

[Melted]

For what it’s worth I think that more than one person was 100% involved. The coincidence of Liebarts report of the man hiding on the north side of the bridge that morning is too much for me to move past.

JMO

 

[shonyakay]

Respectfully snipped

The answer to this question lies within these words:

Sec. 2. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally removes another person, by fraud, enticement, force, or threat of force, from one place to another commits kidnapping.

2024 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 3. Kidnapping and Confinement :: 35-42-3-2. Kidnapping

Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

If BG didn't "remove another person" then one of the elements of kidnapping is not met.

So it's just a defense strategy?

Rhetorical question, does the truth matter to them?

 

[Emma Peel]

Yeah I do worry that someone out there might have tried to have RA's back out of some misplaced sense of neighborliness. That would explain why he was marked cleared without any followup.

All MOO

If I may share my theory:
RA was marked clear by the Resource Officer b/c of his remarkably short stature.

"If the height don't fit, you must acquit."

it's just a theory and JMHO

 

[FrostedGlass]

https://fox59.com/delphi-trial/arrest-me-or-take-me-home-jury-watches-video-richard-allens-first-interview/

He "believes" he was wearing a black jacket, but said he had a blue and black one at the time.

Same interview he changes his 1:30 - 3:30 timeline given when his memory was fresh. Now he said he left around 1:30 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. but "forgot the timing really."

IMO
I wore black, I think I wore black never = I wore blue.

I feel bad that I'm beating a dead horse. I appreciate your opinion, though.

 

[otto]

Ok got ya, thanks. Frustrating to say the least but necessary since wrongful convictions unfortunately do happen.

Can I change my wording to: I just want a direct link between RA and the girls - DNA would be nice. Something that the jury (and the general public) are going to have a real difficult time disregarding.

The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence, just like most successful prosecutions. Many believe that DNA is the magic evidence that proves someone is guilty. However, DNA evidence is not time specific.

Direct evidence is eye-witness testimony: someone saw the accused commit the crime.

The closest we have to direct evidence is the video that Libby took of the person who forced the girls to leave the bridge and go down the hill towards the river. People often say that they would be more convinced of guilt if there was a video. Here, we have a video, and people are still not convinced.

Video evidence is as good as it gets regarding verifiable, direct, eye-witness testimony (from the grave).

 

[photographer4]

yes, very encouraging, we know at least one juror is paying very close attention to the science, which is the thing that tends to get most jurors lost (JMO). This is great news.

They've had some fantastic questions! moo

 

[Melted]

RA: get Mom out of the way so she is not doing any interruptin'. Check



imo

What do you mean by this?

I’m genuinely curious and don’t understand. Are you implying he went to Peru to make sure his mom wouldn’t come to the moon high bridge trail and interrupt the murder?

I’m truly lost on this if you could explain I’d appreciate it

 

[Ursamajr]

I doubt that. Circumstantial evidence carries the same weight as direct evidence and has for centuries.
Those kind of cases still happen today.

Opinion

I agree but some people completely dismiss circumstantial evidence. It's a feature of every single discussion about the Idaho case. I'd like to believe the court of public opinion isn't as important as the justice system but I bet RA and his family would argue otherwise.

 

[photographer4]

Another thing I have started to wonder more about lately, especially in light of those saying one person couldn’t have possibly done all of this alone. I’ve started to wonder if the killer forced one of the victims to help restrain the other.

The autopsy doctor said there were no signs of restraint so, imo, no https://www.wdtn.com/news/delphi-murders-combative-testimony-from-another-bridge-guy-witness/

 

[AugustWest]

So it's just a defense strategy?

Rhetorical question, does the truth matter to them?

In a way, yes. In order to make a motion for directed verdict, a party has to show that sufficient facts have not been established to meet the elements of the crime. I would imagine that in the defense's estimation the only evidence of "removes another person" is the words "down the hill." Without that element, the prosecution can't proceed on that theory of their case.

I won't speak for the defense, but attorneys have a different view of "truth" during a trial than most. Attorneys realize we are in an imperfect and adversarial system where the truth often lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[SouthEnd]

The autopsy doctor said there were no signs of restraint so, imo, no? https://www.wdtn.com/news/delphi-murders-combative-testimony-from-another-bridge-guy-witness/

no sign of ropes/duct tape restraints. IMO if another person was kneeling on top of them, or holding them down with body weight, it wouldn't necessarily leave marks.

All MOO. Every scenario is terrible.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

We must be watching two different trials.

I think the fact that we aren’t “watching the trial” is a huge part of the problem/situation-

As is I think many started with a presumption of guilty, others that he’s getting railroaded, others (like myself) didn’t have enough information to decide so starting with a presumption of innocence and seeing what unfolds at trial, and there’s probably 3-4 other options-

If all I had to go on from what I’ve learned about what has been said at trial, I would need some help getting to guilty BARD, which is different than my personal opinion of his guilt - but the trial isn’t over and I’m not watching YT or spending copious amounts of time pondering (hence some of my stupid and naive questions)

The witnesses described what sounded like different people, and when asked if it was BG agreed - I don’t know why that is, but as a juror I’d want to be sure that there weren’t possibly 2-3 guys on the trails that day and make sure that they all did see BG and that RA was BG and that BG committed the crime- starting with the assumption that RA is innocent until proven guilty and that the P has to prove it BARD and the D doesn’t have to explain how or why a particular piece of evidence or circumstance came to be - just create the doubt - moo