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

[TTF14]

Where is that said?
Haven't jurors always had the discretion to watch it in the jury room?

In every other trial I've followed, this has been the case. Seems like JG has a different procedure.

JMO IMO

 

[Deleted member 296739]

Wasnt KA away caring for somone at the time

pr

She has experience a crime scene leak, doenst want another.

I am not a judge- but I wouldn’t want another leak either- moo

 

[Deleted member 296739]

Where is that said?
Haven't jurors always had the discretion to watch it in the jury room?

Personal experience- sometimes sent a note and got info we needed- other times if it was viewing video evidence, back in the court room- not sure how it works out across the states and state to federal cases - I guess I always assumed it was up to the judge - moo

 

[sunshineray]

The 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

And what exactly does it say, that he has the right to insert himself into deliberations after the jury has been given the case? Or he just has a right to show his face in the courtroom everytime the jury is brought there? Seems a bit dangerous for the jury's seclusion to have any contact at all with either side while in deliberations. JMO

 

[TTF14]

I wonder if one side asked for this procedure - to only view videos in the courtroom and only one time. Did one side not want the jury to be able to slow down the video, pause, zoom in, etc.?

This is not my opinion, but a question if anybody knows.

IMO JMO

 

[DS2021]

It was said during trial. There's a good chance if you Googled it it would tell you which day.

I tried. i guess my google skills are off today lol. i got an answer from someone else

 

[sunshineray]

Where is that said?
Haven't jurors always had the discretion to watch it in the jury room?

I've never heard of this kind of stuff before. No watching of video or audio evidence except in the courtroom and only once, that's it, you can only see that evidence again one time during deliberations!?

 

[al66pine]

Jurors' Hotel Rooms Mini-Bars?

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

@lonetraveler
Maybe you're joking, but FWIW, as part of the jury instructions, judge read this aloud to jury and provided in written form to each member.
"During the trial, you must not consume any alcohol or drugs which would affect your ability to hear the evidence fairly and impartially."*

The language may be subj. to different interp's. Does it mean no consuming alcohol in any quantity (concentration) or no consuming a quantity of alcohol affecting ability to hear the evidence fairly and impartially? IDK.

Just guessing that the hotel rooms mini-bars may not be stocked w alcohol.
Or if they are, that the booze charges are billed to juror-occupant personally.

To Jurors: BYO and To Your Health

_________________________
* Judge's Preliminary Instructions to Jury, on page 13/13

https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/24/Jury-instructions-1.pdf

 

[sunshineray]

Personal experience- sometimes sent a note and got info we needed- other times if it was viewing video evidence, back in the court room- not sure how it works out across the states and state to federal cases - I guess I always assumed it was up to the judge - moo

And when you viewed the evidence in the courtroom was the defendant there?

 

[TTF14]

I've never heard of this kind of stuff before. No watching of video or audio evidence except in the courtroom and only once, that's it, you can only see that evidence again one time during deliberations!?

Yes, this is how I'm understanding it as well. And, again, I would love to be proven wrong about this. I think they should be allowed to watch the "BG" video as many times as they want.

JMO IMO

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, this is how I'm understanding it as well. And, again, I would love to be proven wrong about this. I think they should be allowed to watch the "BG" video as many times as they want.

JMO IMO

And listen/watch the interviews, phone calls, prison videos...anything in evidence. They're deliberating!

 

[Deleted member 296739]

And when you viewed the evidence in the courtroom was the defendant there?

Honestly I don’t remember for 100% but I think yes- both sets of lawyers were for sure- but it’s been 20 yrs - too many moves for jury duty to catch up with me - and last 2 time (in past 5years) I wasn’t put on a jury- but I do believe that the defendant was there with the attorneys- my own experience

 

[Warwick7]

I tried. i guess my google skills are off today lol. i got an answer from someone else

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Ffox59.com%2Fdelphi-trial%2Fdelphi-murders-blood-spatter-expert-weighs-in-on-girls-final-moments%2F&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl2%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

 

[AugustWest]

And what exactly does it say, that he has the right to insert himself into deliberations after the jury has been given the case? Or he just has a right to show his face in the courtroom everytime the jury is brought there? Seems a bit dangerous for the jury's seclusion to have any contact at all with either side while in deliberations. JMO

The 6th Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to confront his accusers:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Emphasis by me.

All these terms and clauses in the Constitution have been interpreted over time to mean certain things. The way this is accomplished is through case law. Someone comes to a court and questions why a defendant is allowed to be present when a jury reviews testimony and exhibits during deliberations. This establishes precedent when the court answers, which adds to the definition of the terms and clauses in the Constitution.

Here is a bunch of case law which would help you understand why a defendant is afforded this right:

Jury - Replaying Testimony – Questions During Deliberations | Casetext

casetext.com

 

[TTF14]

And listen/watch the interviews, phone calls, prison videos...anything in evidence. They're deliberating!

Totally agree. I've never been on a jury so I can't say for sure how I'd feel, but I think I'd wonder why I was only permitted to view exhibits one time. And, if it was only certain exhibits that had that rule, I'd wonder even more. (I don't know if that's the case here.)

JMO IMO

 

[Deleted member 296739]

Jurors' Hotel Rooms Mini-Bars?

@lonetraveler
Maybe you're joking, but FWIW, as part of the jury instructions, judge read this aloud to jury and provided in written form to each member.
"During the trial, you must not consume any alcohol or drugs which would affect your ability to hear the evidence fairly and impartially."*

The language may be subj. to different interp's. Does it mean no consuming alcohol in any quantity (concentration) or no consuming a quantity of alcohol affecting ability to hear the evidence fairly and impartially? IDK.

Just guessing that the hotel rooms mini-bars may not be stocked w alcohol.
Or if they are, that the booze charges are billed to juror-occupant personally.

To Jurors: BYO and To Your Health

_________________________
* Judge's Preliminary Instructions to Jury, on page 13/13

https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/24/Jury-instructions-1.pdf

Rough! I’m not saying that jurors should be stewed- but totally tee totaling might be rough- I hope that was disclosed during jury vetting- that’s some folks daily routine- not saying it’s good or bad but 3 -4 weeks sober October might be a shock - moo

 

[INfisherman]

IMO They will not allow Tobin to testify because he would shine the light on what many believe is junk science. If he was allowed to do that, then we would have to deal with a huge problem of all the individuals who have been found guilty of crimes based tool mark analysis. MOO

So can we assume his knowledge is such that he will be in quite high demand in other trials involving firearms and be on witness lists going forward?

Who are the many who believe ballistics is a junk science? Is it LE? Is it members of the justice system? Is it defense attorneys? Two groups of experts who have differing opinions? Honest questions.

I mean, I understand there’s controversy somewhere out there. But isn’t ballistics evidence allowed almost everywhere except a few districts and/or states? If it’s so backwards, why isn’t everywhere else disallowing such evidence? Seems like the many are actually a few if the majority of courts allow it.

MOO

 

[Tricia]

Be sure and vote in our latest Delphi poll
Click here

 

[gremlin444]

One thing I'd like to know...

We know he was taking Prozac when he was arrested. We know it was said that he has had many years of history of depression/anxiety.

I'd love to see his psych med history from 2016-2018. Did his dose stay the same or did it increase, did he stop taking meds at any point, did he need to switch meds?

 

[INfisherman]

It could for sure, I've just never heard of that before in trials I've followed.

Moo.

Not any jabs implied. Might be due to what other inmates could be yelling, if within earshot (references to child killer, etc.) and do not wish that to impact the jury’s opinion.