Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #209

[katydid23]

And one witness SC who saw a man in a tan jacket and white wash pants.... (search my username for links - i've posted several in this thread to this effect).

A tan jacket could be one full of mud/dirt. White wash jeans are still blue jeans--just lighter in colour, slightly bleached out. It could still be RA/BG.

 

[FromGermany1]

Will do my best

Richard Allen is a manipulative, controlling man who threatened suicide during conversations with his wife, mother, and prison staff in order to achieve personal goals. With prison staff, he wanted better living conditions. With his wife and mother he wanted assurance that they will still love him when they "get it".

He tried to backdoor "I'm a victim" through protestations on video that were not allowed in court. His conditions were allegedly so harsh that he had to eat poop? He washed his face in the toilet and he was giving confessions suicide threats to his wife and mother? If they agree that he was crazy, even if the courts disagree, then he can be forgiven according to Ricky, his wife, and his mother? Nevermind the ravine murders?

The denial surrounding Richard Allens' wife's absence of recognition of Richard Allen as murderer reminds me of this. It almost seems financially motivated - to remain silent when they recognize the person in the video.

The Story Behind Into the Fire: The Lost Daughter

A new Netflix documentary follows Cathy Terkanian, who learns that a child she put up for adoption had been missing for 21 years.

time.com

Maybe, there was one thought by RA's family in 2017: If RA did not commit one evil crime in Delphi (and wasn't the suspect on the MHB), he can't have committed another crime, of which his wife/his mother may have secretly suspected him in the past. So the denial would be very important for them to save their own life since 2017 and for the last 20-25 years before. - MOO

 

[BexLuth0r]

LE are making this a lot harder than it should be with their shoddy record taking and filing. Officer Dan Dulin being a prime example with his failure to press Allen on what he was wearing and other details in his 5 minute parking lot interview!

I am now thinking Allen originally came forward to LE to tell them that he was the guy in the picture and I'll explain why.
Remember, the first time the picture of BG was released it was just a still shot and not a video The source of it had not been declared. He wasn't even officially known as BG then. LE just said they wanted to speak to the person as he was on the trails ( note, not bridge) at around the time Abby and Libby were there.
It was released on Feb 15th at 18:50 and low and behold, the very next day Allen informs LE he was there.
We don't know who took that original message(shock,horror!) but Dulin followed it up a few days later.
Now I'm pretty sure the killer/ Allen didn't think Abby and Libby had a device that produced that picture. The device would have been confiscated the moment he found it. But he didn't. Libby must have kept it well concealed when she shot the video. Hence why Law enforcement managed to find the phone but the girls murderer didn't.
I believe Allen thought the group of girls including Breann Wilber took the picture when he approached them on his way to the monan bridge. One of them even said in their testimony that they were on the trails to hike and TAKE PICTURES! He probably saw them with their phones out when he walked passed.
Now he had a big problem but I guess he figured they took the photo on the trail and not the bridge. Plus his wife probably said that "looks awfully like you dear" when she saw it. "It was probably taken by the three girls I saw when I was down there. Ill speak to LE in the morning and clear this up."
Notice in his statement he only mentions seeing the 3 girls!
But shortly after LE released this fantastic bit of incriminating evidence, Officer Dulin <modsnip>, fails to ask a lead suspect what he was wearing when he was there or more importantly if he was the guy in the photo!!

Wasnt there initially speculation that it had been taken on a trail cam? No one knew it was from Libby's phone.
So I do think your theory fits. It's just a massive shame it wasn't followed up immediately.

 

[mrjitty]

- Double hearsay from an unreliable witness says someone committed the murders

Snipping your excellent post because I think it is under appreciated that even if Judge Gull allowed "odinism' (whatever that is) - Inadmissible stuff is not coming in.

It is my suspicion this was always a hoax concocted by Baldwin. he got caught out by the MW leaks, but then ironically, that really helped with the idea this was all some vast conspiracy rather than a bad decision made by an understandably angry and shocked judge.

Franks hinges on 3 pieces of evidence that the D failed to produce at the hearing - indeed we discovered they'd misrepresented (i prefer lied) about it.

Prof Turco - to establish paganist staging - not produced
FBI BAU - to validate - not produced
"hearsay" - confession - witnesses not produced

So then all you have was two LEOs saying they had no evidence but a hunch

Baldwin knew all this since summer '23 - that's why he misled everyone in the Franks. If he had this evidence, he didn't neeed to engage in so many misrepresentations and wild speculations in the first place. He would have just called FBI BAU expert at the trial and torpedoed the State case.

We've been had.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

He wasn't firm with what he wore so no one should be going with a blue Carhartt jacket or blue jeans because this was never confirmed.

BG wore those clothes, but Richard Allen wasn't sure if what he wore was blue or black or if it was tennis shoes or military. He thought black because of something it had that the blue one didn't, I believe.

How would h be so unsure of what her wore, just the day before? He came home from his mother's just to gt a jacket, but doesn't remember which one, just a day later? Or what shoes he was hiking in?

Also, didn't the LE collect most of these things from his home and test them?

Does anyone have what was collected, tested and ruled out?

Yah, FIVE years later. Obviously there was no forensics left.

What is fact is none of his DNA or blood was at the crime scene, but also nothing of Libby or Abby was found on anything tested from his home and car.

The same car he allegedly drove that day!

Blood isn't something easy to get rid of from the interior of a car I reckon.

Regardless, nothing came back as evidence from his home and car.

JMO MOO JMT

Of course there was no evidence left. He had already confessed to LE that he had been on the bridge that day. Once he saw that photo of BG, he knew he had to get rid of everything incriminating. IMO

 

[Dhighsmith]

Scott Reisch was correct that the defense strategically blundered on Odinism IMO. they should have kept it for cross examination but instead they overplayed their hand, and ended up having to present evidence for it in a contested hearing. Problem is they had no evidence.

They should have known this because it is obvious to anyone who reads the Indiana case law on SODDI that they didn’t have enough. Bob Motta and co actively misled their audiences about this.

MOO

My opinion on their actions revolves mainly on the actual purpose/reasoning behind misleading the public. I suspect primary purpose for misleading public with conspiracy theories is to distract attention from Defendant and place it on the Prosecution, forcing them to be on the defensive when time draws near for trial. The Defense is tasked with providing sufficient assistance for achieving reasonable doubt by juror, a distracted Prosecutor could very well provide juror with the doubt by negative responses to the ongoing online influences of the misleading info.

 

[katydid23]

I don't even care what they collected. Nothing they did collect and test linked RA to the scene or the kids. This is shocking imo after Wala testified that he stated:

"Allen then told Wala he covered Abby and Libby’s bodies with tree branches. He said he exited the area by keeping off the trail to not be seen. He said he returned to his vehicle...." -

Link to above: Allen: ‘I laid in wait’ - Carroll County Comet

Aside the lack of substance here, I noticed he didn't say he changed clothes, got rid of what he wore, washed at the creek or with a water bottle etc... he simply returned to his vehicle? And yet... NO EVIDENCE - not dna, not a single shred of transfer evidence could tie this man or that car to the murders?? That is absurd in my opinion!

So you believe him when he says he returned and climbed straight into his car, but don't believe the part about him killing the girls?

Supporting link to no DNA ties RA or anyone else to the crime scene: Delphi murder trial: No DNA ties suspect or anyone else to crime scene, expert says

One of our very own WS members has a signature or a tagline, I forget which member or if its a tag or signature line, but if I recall rightly, it's a quote by Edmond Locard, a French Criminologist who I believe said: "every contact leaves a trace". - here is a link should you wish to learn more: Trace Evidence: Principles

Of course every contact leaves a trace. But five years is a long enough time to erase a lot of incriminating traces, imo.

 

[Tricia]

The new Websleuths Delphi poll is up. CLICK HERE
The results for yesterday are as follows;
Guilty and acted alone 76.6%^
Guilty but had help 1.4%
Not Guilty 8.3%
I don't know 13.8%

 

[shonyakay]

Hearsay:
(1) The statement must be made outside of court; if you are under oath then it isn't hearsay.
(2) It must be a statement being presented as evidence to prove the truth of the statement itself.

<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped>

Thanks. I did find this also.


"Hearsay evidence is testimony or documents quoting people who are not present in court. It is a form of second-hand testimony, and it is generally inadmissible at trial to prove a particular fact. This is known as the “Hearsay Rule” under the court’s rules of evidence"

Indiana Hearsay Rules and Exceptions Attorney - Eskew Law

The Hearsay Rule and its exceptions are very technical and require an experienced attorney to fully understand their application. Call Eskew Law.

eskewlaw.com

 

[katydid23]

Question: Was that the witness that saw someone young with a beautiful face?

In many photos of him he does look very young, and his blue eyes are very beautiful. I can see a fleeting look giving that 1st impression. IMO

 

[shonyakay]

The new Websleuths Delphi poll is up. CLICK HERE
The results for yesterday are as follows;
Guilty and acted alone 76.6%^
Guilty but had help 1.4%
Not Guilty 8.3%
I don't know 13.8%

Thanks Tricia. I always seem to post right after you.

 

[katydid23]

Do we have any idea of what will happen tomorrow?

I'm guessing the D will pivot to the confessions, and will bring in their expert on 'false' confessions. IMO

 

[katydid23]

BG had a hat on. Could he have used the hat as a makeshift "glove", knowing that his bare hand might leave DNA behind? Or perhaps he had a bandanna or something in his pocket-- even actual gloves?

His hands were in his pockets---maybe he was hiding that he had gloves on?

 

[FromGermany1]

In many photos of him he does look very young, and his blue eyes are very beautiful. I can see a fleeting look giving that 1st impression. IMO

BLUE eyes?? Do you all remember, that the eyes shouldn't have been blue?

 

[sunshineray]

The defense can call him to testify without naming him as a SODDI

For what purpose do you think the defense would call him other than SODDI?

 

[katydid23]

This is a top-notch defense team, especially as public defenders.

Their Franks Motions were full of lies and misleading information. They leaked sealed documents and pictures-TWICE. I don't see that as top notch. IMO

 

[minor4th]

His wife is not a witness, but I would like to hear what happened when he arrived home that day. He must have been covered with blood, from head to toe. Libby put up a good fight.

This is what I’d like to know. We know the police talked to the wife and daughter. What did they say?

 

[girlhasnoname]

The problem is that in most cases in order to be able to post any mid day updates, the lucky media members who are picked each day have to run out at breaks and shove their handwritten notes to another reporter from their team...and that reporter then has to try to interpret the notes. Later in the day the in courtroom reporter usually goes back over the daytime update articles and adds details/makes corrections....the article you see at 8 pm is very different than the one at noon. The people/reporters who are there who don't have a team are sending out short tweets during breaks, and then trying to recreate a whole story from their notes at the end of the day. The MSM reporters who didn't get one of the media seats that day are then depending on getting information from the reporters who did get in.

This is not the fault of the reporters. Its the fault of the way the rules have been set up for this trial.

If the reporters all said "hey, public, we are not going to post any updates during the day because there will be mistakes and it will be incomplete, just wait until 6 or 7 pm and then you'll get a fleshed out and carefully edited article covering the whole day"...people would have a fit.

I'd have to respectfully disagree with that statement. Personally, I'd rather see each reporter give their own summary of their notes and statements of what was said in Court that day rather than 'handing off' to others for interpretation. Which we all know things will be lost or misstated under those circumstances under the best of scenarios.

I believe those covering the story and running notes out to the public are those who are chasing ratings, like$$$ and click$$$. I wait until the next day to read and listen to reports of what happened the previous day's testimony.

But to each their own.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

A third-party confession to the crime is direct evidence. As we see with the evidence against RA, timelines can change and there can be fact questions about alibis and their veracity.

Did they bring that evidence to the hearing?

It’s hard for the Judge to allow it in if you don’t front!

 

[sunshineray]

Given how lousy the BG photo is, and how the things that should be identifying features such as eye shape and colour, face shape, nose shape etc are non existent in the photo / video from Lg’s phone, I am not surprised they won’t allow the jury’s perception to be prejudiced to RA by presenting photos of him from the time of the crime. Moooo.

It was the absence definitive times on the pictures the prosecution wanted to enter that was objected to, not the fact that the prosecution wanted to show the jury what RA looked like back in 2017.

The same kind of issue came up (and others too) when the defense witness Max Baker (an intern at AB's law firm) couldn't pin specific dates on the videos in a compilation they wanted to show yesterday. The defense will most likely doing a do-over today with that stuff.

Yesterday seems like it was a bad day for the defense with witness put on that had nothing relevant to offer other than Dr. Wala's supervisor. She wound up bolstering the fact that RA was not acting/sounding like he was in psychosis behavior on the phone calls where he confessed to his family members.

AJMO

Referencing Day 12 &13:

Murder Sheet

The Murder Sheet is a weekly true crime podcast hosted by journalist Áine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee. We take a journalistic approach to covering true crime. We have broken national news on major cases, like the Delphi murders and the Burger Chef murders. We also cover plenty of other...

art19.com