Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #210

[photographer4]

One might also suggest that RA came forward to help HIMSELF because he knew or suspected that he was seen and/or photographed at MHB that afternoon and wanted to get ahead of the revelation of that witness testimony or photographic evidence.

In his 2002 interview with LE, RA contradicts multiple things he said in his 2017 interview - all to create greater separation or exclusion from incriminating details. Lying once more facts are discovered to create the illusion of innocence is a common strategy among criminals.

Well, we don't really know what was said in the initial interview because its not recorded, or hasn't been produced as a recording to date that I know of. We don't know what DD asked him or how he asked it. What we do know is Dan Dulin met him and didn't seem to think much of the meeting because he said he didn't even think of RA again until 2022:

"Dulin told the court he didn’t think much of the interview until investigators contacted him in 2022 after Shank found his 2017 report. He was asked if he’d spoken to Allen. He searched his computer, found a document he’d typed and turned over his files." -

https://fox59.com/delphi-trial/delp...17-put-allen-in-investigators-sights-in-2022/

That quote made me wonder as well, did Dan not turn in his notes originally in 2017 when he met RA?? If not why not? Why did he need to turn over his files... in 2022? How do we know they're not edited? I'm not accusing anyone - I am asking. How do we know? MOO.

 

[Crazyjster]

For the people who believe bridge guy is the murderer, could I just ask what you think beyond a reasonable doubt makes bridge guy the murderer? We see bridge guy in the video, it could be and I think it is RA, what after that proves he was the murderer?

I'm just curious how can you defiantly prove it is RA?

 

[Tricia]

Please remember to put "In my opinion" or "IMO" when posting non-facts about the case.
Thank you.
Tricia

 

[katydid23]

My issue is the State hasn't proven it BARD (for me - others may feel differently, and that is ok). They had the mere presence of a man on the bridge and then it looks like they bent their case to fit him vs letting the evidence speak for the kids. They don't have any dna / no transfer evidence, flimsy as heck 'confessions' - tainted clearly by the state's own psychologist... I'm sorry. I can't convict him based on the flimsy case presented by the state. The jury may well convict him, I don't know. I just know I would not.

I think the Prosecution did get a three run Homerun though, with the audio tapes of his confessions to his mother and his wife.

I believe the jurors heard him in his own words, in his own voice, under no duress, speaking to the 2 people he loves the most, and sincerely confessing his worst sins. He bared his soul to them.

On top of that, his voice was then compared to the voice of BG, and they sound like a perfect match, according to many who were in court.

So after hearing those confessions, I think the jury will be more likely to accept the confession that Dr Wala testified to. That confession was bolstered by the info of BW's white van actually being right there on the gravel road and interrupting his sick crime. Just like he reportedly described it to his therapist.

She was absolutely unprofessional and deserves to be fired---but you don't have to pour the baby out with the bathwater. IMO

 

[snarast]

Thank you for this. I’ve followed this case for many years and felt like there was definite substance to KAK/TK and his crew. I thought it was crazy they were dredging the Wabash and they were about to bust the whole thing open. But nope. He was just a lying liar that lies.

I was also aware of a lot of the Odinist theories and believed there was some weird stuff going on there and there were certainly a lot of strange coincidences. But again, deep dives into the theories yielded little of substance.

Then along came RA’s arrest that shocked everyone. Certainly he has to be linked to KAK or something? Nope. Just RA by himself. Over time, more and more comes out that really makes it seem like he’s the guy. I was unimpressed with law enforcement’s efforts and competency in this case, and they definitely missed out on more potential evidence against him because of how long it took them to un-lose a lead.

I wasn’t sure what to expect at trial. Some things I thought should be there are missing, but ultimately it’s a fairly strong case. A lot of what was missing from the other theories is here and points to RA.

And I feel pretty strongly if they were trying to set someone up, it would be someone like KAK that would not attract much sympathy. Instead, they went the hard route which means to me they must feel like this is actually the guy.

JMO

Well said. I can’t rule out KAK’s involvement completely - but if so it would be as an instigator - like providing details of Libby’s location. See KAK isn’t just a liar - he is also a thoroughly unpleasant person who likes to be the puppetmaster. And seems to have a sadist streak if nothing else.

I wouldn’t put it past him to ”unleash” this strange histrionic rapist RA on innocent girls. But I have no evidence for that at all. It’s just occurred to me because of the strange timing. On the other hand maybe RA walked to the bridge every week for ten years prepared to strike if an opportunity arose. He is weird enough.

IMO

 

[IzzyBlanche]

For the people who believe bridge guy is the murderer, could I just ask what you think beyond a reasonable doubt makes bridge guy the murderer? We see bridge guy in the video, it could be and I think it is RA, what after that proves he was the murderer?

He ordered them down the hill. They were found deceased down the hill.

The idea that BG ordered them down the hill where SOD killed them makes no sense. Occam's Razor.

IMO.

 

[ClearAhead]

The defense played a bunch of videos from the prison, showing RA at his worst. I'm sure he was probably rubbing feces on the wall, dancing around naked, playing with self, screaming incoherently, etc.

They want the jury to think that he was so crazy that any confessions he made were unreliable.

That could be a risky strategy though. Maybe the jury sees him acting psycho, and it makes them think he is psycho enough to kill 2 young girls?

Chicken vs Egg theory---Which came first?

RA is an innocent man who was driven crazy by prison, and began acting psychotic?

OR

RA was already a psycho, that drank all his life, had pervy violent thoughts, molested others over the years, finally snapped and committed 2 murders, then when incarcerated he had a meltdown, and eventually began blabbing about his many sins?

Yes, excellent points, which came first indeed!
This is the very same reason I think the D intentionally avoided placing focus on his pre-existing mental health issues. I’m hopeful the P will pull something out of their hat during rebuttal. MOO

 

[Arkay]

For the people who believe bridge guy is the murderer, could I just ask what you think beyond a reasonable doubt makes bridge guy the murderer? We see bridge guy in the video, it could be and I think it is RA, what after that proves he was the murderer?

That he forced them down the hill by BG’s own words? That Libby was concerned enough about his presence to secretly record him?
That they were in fact murdered after they went down the hill?

That if BG was an innocent bystander, having put himself near enough on the bridge for he and the girls to be audible in the video, that he would then be the consummate, A #1 witness to having seen them just prior to what turned out to be a tragedy?

Yet this BG never came forward the instant the murder was public to state what he saw and if he could provide relevant details to help find the killer?

Jmo

 

[Gemmie]

Quote from link below:

"Libby died from her wounds in a large pool of blood while leaning against the tree, Cicero said. He said he believes she was then dragged about 20 feet to where her body was found."

Delphi murder trial: Libby's blood was likely mixed with her tears, expert says

A pattern on the body of Delphi murder victim Libby German showed her blood was likely mixed with tears, an officer testified.

abc7ny.com

That is the part I just do not understand (dragging her body to be parallel with Abby's). For what purpose? There had to be a purpose in the killer(s) mind(s). Otherwise, why not just leave her where she dropped to the ground? Why not drag Abby, who would have been easier to drag, over by Libby? Just why not leave them where they died?! I can't wrap my head around their reasoning.

 

[KSwizzle]

He ordered them down the hill. They were found deceased down the hill.

The idea that BG ordered them down the hill where SOD killed them makes no sense. Occam's Razor.

IMO.

I’m still not 100% sure it’s an absolute proven fact that bridge guy is RA, I think he is, but outside of Harshman being allowed to state it was his voice which MOO shouldn’t have been allowed to be said like that we can’t 100% prove it based off of witness testimony that potentially at least two other males were in the area at the time, you believe without a doubt that RA is bridge guy and, outside any DNA or other physical evidence besides his confessions he was also the killer?

MOO not trying to judge anyone here

 

[katydid23]

For the people who believe bridge guy is the murderer, could I just ask what you think beyond a reasonable doubt makes bridge guy the murderer? We see bridge guy in the video, it could be and I think it is RA, what after that proves he was the murderer?

He orders them off the bridge at gunpoint---You hear one of the girls say GUN, and hear him say 'Guys , Down the Hill'

That is the very last moment that the girls were seen or heard from again. Even with dozens of calls and texts to them in the aftermath they never responded. The last attempt to unlock the phone for use was about 20 minutes after they were forced off the bridge.

After BG forced them down the hill they were taken to the creek and then across to their brutal deaths. We can see, in the snapshots of BG, that there is an outline of the gun in his front pocket.

It is basic common sense. If a stranger forces 2 girls off a bridge and out into the woods at gunpoint, and they are found dead the next morning, what do we think happened? Is the stranger with the gun that kidnapped them not considered the prime murder suspect?

On top of that, RA confessed over 60 times. Hard to ignore that, imo.

 

[Myvice]

Even the 95 or 100 lbs that Abby was (I've seen both listed for her) is difficult when it's dead weight. Not the easiest thing in the world to do. As for Libby... I honestly can't imagine even 2 men being able to move 200 lbs of dead weight. It would be difficult at best, but on that terrain? No way, no how, IMO.

MOO but part of military training is learning how to move a body.

 

[KSwizzle]

To me there’s just a fundamental difference in how I think compared to others and that’s ok, I don’t believe they have proven BG is 100% RA, I don’t believe they have proven BARD bridge guy is the killer, and that’s ok, MOO and I won’t spam the threads with my thought on this anymore, no judgment towards anyone either

 

[katydid23]

That is the part I just do not understand (dragging her body to be parallel with Abby's). For what purpose? There had to be a purpose in the killer(s) mind(s). Otherwise, why not just leave her where she dropped to the ground? Why not drag Abby, who would have been easier to drag, over by Libby? Just why not leave them where they died?! I can't wrap my head around their reasoning.

Apparently they were better concealed in the nook area that Abby was in. They were more tucked away and not as visible to anyone passing by. IMO

 

[Crazyjster]

I’m still not 100% sure it’s an absolute proven fact that bridge guy is RA, I think he is, but outside of Harshman being allowed to state it was his voice which MOO shouldn’t have been allowed to be said like that we can’t 100% prove it based off of witness testimony that potentially at least two other males were in the area at the time, you believe without a doubt that RA is bridge guy and, outside any DNA or other physical evidence besides his confessions he was also the killer?

MOO not trying to judge anyone here

I agree...there no physical evidence tying him to the crime scene, the gun evidence can be argued, the audio and video evidence is not conclusive, and the confessions are not full of any information that RA was not given in discovery...regardless of his mental state he was given the crime scene photos and details so he had the info of the killings...if he had confessed before he had the info I'd be more apt to believe the confessions...

IMO

 

[katydid23]

To me there’s just a fundamental difference in how I think compared to others and that’s ok, I don’t believe they have proven BG is 100% RA, I don’t believe they have proven BARD bridge guy is the killer, and that’s ok, MOO and I won’t spam the threads with my thought on this anymore, no judgment towards anyone either

Beyond a REASONABLE doubt, not beyond a doubt 100%.

There is ALWAYS a sliver of a doubt. Maybe BG forced them off the hill and then a serial killer hiding under the bridge pulled a gun on BG and took the girls for himself? Cannot 100% prove that could not have happened. But I go with common sense first. What is most likely?

Libby took a video of the creepy guy that was following them and scared them. He forced them off the bridge at gunpoint. What is the LOGICAL answer? To me the most logical and probable answer is that he finished what he started. IMO

 

[photographer4]

How was lying that he didn’t see the girls helping police in any way?

How can you prove he was lying?

 

[ClearAhead]

For the people who believe bridge guy is the murderer, could I just ask what you think beyond a reasonable doubt makes bridge guy the murderer? We see bridge guy in the video, it could be and I think it is RA, what after that proves he was the murderer?

I’d still draw the conclusion BG is guilty beyond any doubt, reasonable or even probable. BG/RA is not a child who got tricked or forced into kidnapping two teens to turn over to an anonymous person (AP) to slit their throats. Makes no sense, why would AP need BG to kidnap them, knowingly leaving BG as a witness when AP could’ve done it without leaving a witness.

I only might change my mind if RA testified and told what could be proven as the truth. It’s just that too many stories are being told on his behalf, far too many to be believable any more. JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

That is the part I just do not understand (dragging her body to be parallel with Abby's). For what purpose? There had to be a purpose in the killer(s) mind(s). Otherwise, why not just leave her where she dropped to the ground? Why not drag Abby, who would have been easier to drag, over by Libby? Just why not leave them where they died?! I can't wrap my head around their reasoning.

Those are all good questions.. I was hoping to hear some answers to those questions.
There were 13 months of RA rambling to himself and surely he would have said something about the crime scent that only the murderer would know.

 

[Crazyjster]

Beyond a REASONABLE doubt, not beyond a doubt 100%.

There is ALWAYS a sliver of a doubt. Maybe BG forced them off the hill and then a serial killer hiding under the bridge pulled a gun on BG and took the girls for himself? Cannot 100% prove that could not have happened. But I go with common sense first. What is most likely?

Libby took a video of the creepy guy that was following them and scared them. He forced them off the bridge at gunpoint. What is the LOGICAL answer? To me the most logical and probable answer is that he finished what he started. IMO

But if there is no evidence RA was actually involved, why should he have to be convicted? Just because someone has to pay? Last I checked we do not convict based on emotion.