Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #212

[TristanP]

This is exactly something I would have expected the prosecution to ask on cross, but was not. And it should be pretty well-known she did not have access to the physical phone (she testified she examined the extractions provided to her by the defense), so that’s a super safe question to ask as she’ll have zero idea the state of the sensor.

JMO

Look, I’ve had about enough of your logic. Can you please get with the program?

 

[MiniMoo]

It could change everything.

I want to KNOW the TRUTH. “Educated guesses” and Google searches are not sufficient.

I would think Google searches aren't exactly an expert or specialist and am not sure why any would be admissible in this trial.

JMO MOO JMT

 

[MassGuy]

If it’s from water damage and the girls crossed the creek at 2:30ish, why did it keep working for 3 hours?

It still never moved, and any scenario involving the girls not being killed at that spot is beyond insane. I don't even know what to say at this point.

 

[TristanP]

The jurors asked several follow-up questions to Eldridge including if she ever wrote her own timeline of Libby’s phone.

“No,” she said, adding she had limited time.

80 hours wasn’t enough time to create a basic timeline??

https://fox59.com/news/delphi-murders-expert-says-headphone-jack-inserted-into-libbys-phone-removed-in-dead-of-night/

Have you seen how complicated those Cellebrite extraction reports are?

 

[TristanP]

First, this is the witness's opinion....
Second how does anyone know how long or short it takes for water, debris and blood to move in and damage a headphone jack?

It was from the Cellebrite extraction data. It wasn’t just an opinion.

 

[TristanP]

I would think Google searches aren't exactly an expert or specialist and am not sure why any would be admissible in this trial.

JMO MOO JMT

Exactly. If a defense witness said they just googled something during a break, the opinions would be much different…

 

[katydid23]

If it’s from water damage and the girls crossed the creek at 2:30ish, why did it keep working for 3 hours?

Because it takes awhile for things to stop working. The water has to seep into closed area and do their damage. I dropped my iPhone 8 in a pool and it worked fine for over an hour---I laid it in the sun thinking it would dry out....but when I tried it an hour or so later it was very glitchy and barely worked, then died.

 

[katydid23]

It was from the Cellebrite extraction data. It wasn’t just an opinion.

It's still just an opinion because the Cellebrite extraction is basically a notification saying the audio port is being used---but that does not mean it's accurate. It could be something besides headphones---like mud or water

 

[MiniMoo]

Exactly. If a defense witness said they just googled something during a break, the opinions would be much different…

Most definitely should not have been allowed in.

JMO MOO JMT

 

[katydid23]

It could change everything.

I want to KNOW the TRUTH. “Educated guesses” and Google searches are not sufficient.

It changes nothing. The bodies were laying where they were killed. They never moved. The phone never moved. No one had headphones on at 10 pm.

 

[Warwick7]

It was from the Cellebrite extraction data. It wasn’t just an opinion.

Not correct.
An expert witness is specifically giving their own opinions at trial, based on their specialized knowledge and analysis of the evidence presented in the case, unlike lay witnesses who are typically limited to testifying about what they directly observed.

 

[TristanP]

Because it takes awhile for things to stop working. The water has to seep into closed area and do their damage. I dropped my iPhone 8 in a pool and it worked fine for over an hour---I laid it in the sun thinking it would dry out....but when I tried it an hour or so later it was very glitchy and barely worked, then died.

Ah, so yours died and didn’t say there were headphones plugged in? A different outcome than what others are talking about.

I am still pretty astonished that the argument in this thread is about how the headphone Jack had to be showing as in use because the phone was exposed to water, dirt or blood, when there is literal testimony from the state’s own expert that he didnt check the phone to know if it had been wet, gotten dirt in the headphone Jack, or had blood on it.

Yes, it was under Abby, but Abby only bled around her neck. There wasn’t blood on her clothing or body below her neck.

 

[katydid23]

Ah, so yours died and didn’t say there were headphones plugged in? A different outcome than what others are talking about.

I don't know if it made a notification about the headphones or not. Screen was too glitchy. But it did start working again the next afternoon after it has dried out. But it never really worked correctly again.

I am still pretty astonished that the argument in this thread is about how the headphone Jack had to be showing as in use because the phone was exposed to water, dirt or blood, when there is literal testimony from the state’s own expert that he didnt check the phone to know if it had been wet, gotten dirt in the headphone Jack, or had blood on it.

So what. That officer was just downloading texts and pictures. He had no known reason to look at the audio port at that time. Lesson learned.

Yes, it was under Abby, but Abby only bled around her neck. There wasn’t blood on her clothing or body below her neck.

Her pants were wet and the phone was in the pockets when they crossed the creek.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Or like in Murdaugh, where the defense did not have their experts write reports so they wouldn't have to turn them over as discovery to the prosecution before trial. I hope that's not what happened here, because I think Baldwin and Rozzi are better than Harpootlian.

You're a good person gremlin44, as much as I disliked Harpo and Griffin I think they were less sneaky and underhanded than this Defense will ever be. It was great to see the State's experts nail their Defense Experts on the stand.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

I am a bit surprised the prosecution didn't lead evidence on this. Aren't expert reports supposed to be discovered pre-trial?

Obviously the phone was not plugged in anywhere - that is laughable. But they should have led evidence to suggest why this might be.

Feels like a fail to me.

Credit where it's due to the defence IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think this was the single biggest witness for the defense, as it was crucial they discredit that cartridge. Even if things went half as bad for them as it sounds they did, it’s a huge coup for the prosecution.

I get the impression that the jury wasn’t buying what this expert was selling, based on the questions they asked.

I expected them to make their money here, and I really don’t think they came remotely close. I don’t even think they achieved a wash.

They had no money because they spent it all on their 'Expert" Neuroscientist testimony.

IMO

 

[MassGuy]

They had no money because they spent it all on their 'Expert" Neuroscientist testimony.

IMO

Those experts scored some points, but they didn’t come remotely close to doing what I thought they’d be able to do.

I thought the ballistics expert would really earn his money, and that never materialized. The juror questions solidified that for me.

 

[m00c0w]

Have you seen how complicated those Cellebrite extraction reports are?

Yes. Hundreds of them. Do you have a specific question about them?

 

[Boxer]

Ah, so yours died and didn’t say there were headphones plugged in? A different outcome than what others are talking about.

I am still pretty astonished that the argument in this thread is about how the headphone Jack had to be showing as in use because the phone was exposed to water, dirt or blood, when there is literal testimony from the state’s own expert that he didnt check the phone to know if it had been wet, gotten dirt in the headphone Jack, or had blood on it.

Yes, it was under Abby, but Abby only bled around her neck. There wasn’t blood on her clothing or body below her neck.

The point is arcing occurs. Temperature, debris, moisture and time create variables. This is more of the defense using a small variable to launch more conspiracy.

 

[m00c0w]

Ah, so yours died and didn’t say there were headphones plugged in? A different outcome than what others are talking about.

I am still pretty astonished that the argument in this thread is about how the headphone Jack had to be showing as in use because the phone was exposed to water, dirt or blood, when there is literal testimony from the state’s own expert that he didnt check the phone to know if it had been wet, gotten dirt in the headphone Jack, or had blood on it.

Yes, it was under Abby, but Abby only bled around her neck. There wasn’t blood on her clothing or body below her neck.

The main reason is that it makes far more sense than a group of ninja odinists deciding to plug in headphones into their victim’s phone that they also left at the crime scene?

I think the prosecution did a horrible job on cross, but that doesn’t mean the witness actually gave credible answers. The prosecution could have easily countered this with:

- Was the phone unlocked at any point after 2:14?
- Was the screen on at any point after 2:14, aside from turning on as a result of an incoming call or notification?
- Was there any audio actually played from the phone after 2:14?
- Did you check the moisture sensor in the headphone port to see if there could have been a false reading due to water exposure?
- Do you hold a current Cellebrite certification?

JMO