VERDICT WATCH Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #214

[FrostedGlass]

I’ve never seen evidence leaks before. Maybe the D should be happy they’re even standing in that courtroom allowed to try their case at all.

MOO

This is my brief summary from the March 18, 2024 Contempt Hearing:
Long-time attorneys John Boren, Kay Beehler and Andrew Maternowski testified for the defense. They stated that the war room practices done by B&R are common practices. There were 8 more attorneys who signed affidavits for the defense, among them are Joel Wieneke and well-known Thomas Leatherman out of Elkhart Co., IN.
page 109 of the second document

3.18.24 Contempt - Google Drive

drive.google.com

 

[TTF14]

not proven
not shown to be guilty beyond doubt
not even physically placed at the crime scene
not identified as bridge guy by several witnesses who actually saw bridge guy
only proven to be present at the crime scene by his own report
5 years to even be classed as a person of interest

"you want to know what we know...and one day you will"????

yeah - we know next to nothing and you are gonna get blamed!

sorry for all the believers but i've seen nothing to make me think that this guy is guilty

I agree.

 

[sunshineray]

They are in separate rooms. RA is not in the same room w/the jurors. I know words can be misconstrued because I do it way too often. Glad you asked.

Thank you to everyone who responded!

But they're allowed under Indiana law to watch, on what CC tv, the jurors as they review evidence? Why, for what purpose/reason is that RA's right? The evidence is all admitted and available for the jury. Why is he entitled to see or hear anything the jury does during deliberations?
It makes no sense to me what right of his is being protected by this? It's amounts to spying on the jury, IMO

 

[cherrybier]

The defendant is tried again.

*could be.

It's up to the state to decide.

They most likely will IMO but can decide not to.

 

[TTF14]

This is my brief summary from the March 18, 2024 Contempt Hearing:
Long-time attorneys John Boren, Kay Beehler and Andrew Maternowski testified for the defense. They stated that the war room practices done by B&R are common practices. There were 8 more attorneys who signed affidavits for the defense, among them are Joel Wieneke and well-known Thomas Leatherman out of Elkhart Co., IN.
page 109 of the second document

3.18.24 Contempt - Google Drive

drive.google.com

Thank you.

 

[TTF14]

But they're allowed under Indiana law to watch, on what CC tv, the jurors as they review evidence? Why, for what purpose/reason is that RA's right? The evidence is all admitted and available for the jury. Why is he entitled to see or hear anything the jury does during deliberations?
It makes no sense to me what right of his is being protected by this? It's amounts to spying on the jury, IMO

Is he actually doing this, though? It's a strange law to have on the books, but is he doing this?

 

[lonetraveler]

I think Sundays are family days. [I'm not sure about overnights though. doubt it]

Yeah, pillow talk could get in the way.

 

[TTF14]

*could be.

It's up to the state to decide.

They most likely will IMO but can decide not to.

I don't think this would be a popular choice for most of the locals, but that's just my opinion.

 

[fcavanaugh]

If I'm not mistaken in the Read trial there was one juror that just wasn't convinced. After discussing it at length the jury reached unanimous "not guilty" agreement on second degree murder and leaving the scene.

With this trial there could be that one juror who just needs more research to make a decision.

The KR Jury was hung and the Judge ordered them to continue deliberating. Shortly after being sent back to deliberations, the Foreman sent a note to the Judge stating paraphrased- ‘based on moral and ethical beliefs, we are still at an impasse deadlocked/unable to reach unanimous decision’. At that point, the Judge thanked the Jury for their time and diligence and declared a Mistrial.
I think what you may be referring to was post Mistrial, a couple/few of the jurors reached out to KR’s defense attorneys to let them know the majority vote in deliberations was Not Guilty.

The prosecution stated they will retry KR and iirc her attorney’s filed some motions asking for charges to be dismissed. I haven’t followed that case as closely as I did during the trial but I believe she’s scheduled to be retried sometime early next year.

At any rate, all cases and juries are different and there’s just no way to know which way the wind is blowing so to speak or how long a given Jury needs/takes to render a decision.

IMHOO

ETA-punctuation, spacing because posting from darn phone ughhhh…

 

[wtiger]

*could be.

It's up to the state to decide.

They most likely will IMO but can decide not to.

and with the same half arsed case - the same result will come

i get that the family needs someone to blame but that MUST be properly proven beyond reasonable doubt

<modsnip: "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle that applies throughout the judicial process and within the judicial system; it does not apply to the general public who are allowed to have an opinion>

 

[cherrybier]

The KR Jury was hung and the Judge ordered them to continue deliberating. Shortly after being sent back to deliberations, the Foreman sent a note to the Judge stating paraphrased- based on moral and ethical beliefs, we are still at an impasse deadlocked/unable to reach unanimous decision. At that point, the Judge thanked the Jury for their time and diligence and declared a Mistrial.
I think what you’re referring to was post Mistrial, a couple/few of the jurors reached out to KR’s defense attorneys to let them know the majority vote in deliberations was Not Guilty. The prosecution stated they will retry KR and iirc her attorney’s filed some motions asking for charges to be dismissed. I haven’t followed that case as closely as I did during the trial but I believe she’s scheduled to be retried sometime early next year.

At any rate, all cases and juries are different and there’s just no way to know which way the wind is blowing so to speak or how long a given Jury needs/takes to render a decision.

IMHOO

Yep it's a moot point trying to discern what a jury is doing and will do.

Totally unpredictable!

Moo.

 

[INfisherman]

For a fired round yes, where there are explosion and barrel signatures, but the metal strike marks from pulling a round into the chanber, the ejecting it at a microscopic level are exactly a metallurgists expertise.

Respectfully,

I get from where you’re coming. Please consider:

Do you feel a metallurgist would have been able to determine what to do with a gun to enhance the markings on it? Do you feel a metallurgist could accurately testify whether the tests conducted by the state were valid ballistics tests? Do you feel a metallurgist is qualified to give sworn testimony to refute any ballistics test methods including best practices or how to eliminate other weapons besides the one in question?

I do not dispute that a metallurgist would have value of some sort - I dispute that they have the in depth knowledge and expertise to accurately answer any & all questions pertaining to a firearm or it’s operation or to refute specific testimony which may not be related to metals.

It’s not even worth debating really. Perfectly fine to agree to disagree.

 

[Salah11]

I don't think this would be a popular choice for most of the locals, but that's just my opinion.

You believe they wouldn't want the man accused of the murders retried if it’s a hung jury?

 

[TTF14]

You believe they wouldn't want the man accused of the murders retried if it’s a hung jury?

Yes, that is what I meant.

JMO

 

[crhedBngr]

Juror's hotel room must have a hellava mini-bar.

Which better be free, IMO!

 

[sunshineray]

Is he actually doing this, though? It's a strange law to have on the books, but is he doing this?

Isn't that what was being said? That's why RA was brought to court on the day the jury was reviewing evidence in the courtroom? So you think he just was brought to the court today, to sit in a private room with his lawyers there, while the jury was let into the courtroom to look at evidence? Why is it his right to be there? Why get him out of jail to sit in a room for no reason? I'm just trying to understand what right of RA's is that satisfying? I've never heard of such a thing before.

 

[Warwick7]

*could be.

It's up to the state to decide.

They most likely will IMO but can decide not to.

M00 he is the killer and too dangerous to be let loose. M00 they would definitely go to trial again if there is a hung jury.

 

[cherrybier]

not proven
not shown to be guilty beyond doubt
not even physically placed at the crime scene
not identified as bridge guy by several witnesses who actually saw bridge guy
only proven to be present at the crime scene by his own report
5 years to even be classed as a person of interest

"you want to know what we know...and one day you will"????

yeah - we know next to nothing and you are gonna get blamed!

sorry for all the believers but i've seen nothing to make me think that this guy is guilty

BBM

I was waiting for something gripping but it didn't eventuate.

Moo.

 

[TTF14]

Isn't that what was being said? That's why RA was brought to court on the day the jury was reviewing evidence in the courtroom? So you think he just was brought to the court today, to sit in a private room with his lawyers there, while the jury was let into the courtroom to look at evidence? Why is it his right to be there? Why get him out of jail to sit in a room for no reason? I'm just trying to understand what right of RA's is that satisfying? I've never heard of such a thing before.

I think he was brought into the courtroom to see the evidence they were seeing. Not to see the jury.

 

[TTF14]

BBM

I was waiting for something gripping but it didn't eventuate.

Moo.

Same.