GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #215

[DS2021]

What has it cost thus far?

It'd be 200 dollars per citizen

 

[iamshadow21]

I’m fairly certain everyone in Westville would claim they were innocent.

JMO

Well, there is widespread overcrowding. I guess we'll just have to let them all go.

MOO

 

[INfisherman]

Just playing devil’s advocate here… I agree you need to know the time the crime took place in order to know what you need to move away from.

But if RA was the killer, he would know the time the murders took place as soon as they happened. So when he was questioned a couple days later, he knew then what time he needed to move away from in order to distance himself from the scene . He didn’t obtain the knowledge of the date of the crime after his 2017 interview but before his 2022 interviews and then adjust his timings in the 2022 interview.

So it doesn’t make sense to me to say that he has changed his time in 2022 in order to distance himself from the time of the murder. If he had committed the murders, he’d know he needed to distance himself straight away and would have done so in his 2017 interviews.

IIRC,

He wasn’t a suspect in 2017, he was simply portraying a good citizen & giving a statement to help, which was possibly an attempt at distancing himself (I’m coming forward, so they won’t suspect me).

By 2022, he was being interviewed & asked questions concerning his whereabouts, potentially making him feel like he was a suspect. That more than likely tipped him off & possibly what led to changing his alibi/time.

MOO

 

[INfisherman]

Well, there is widespread overcrowding. I guess we'll just have to let them all go.

MOO

Well, only the ones whose convictions aren’t overturned by Tobin’s testimony.

MOO

 

[DS2021]

It'd be 200 dollars per citizen

Gasps and tears as graphic images of Abby and Libby are shown to jurors at Delphi trial

Graphic images from the crime scene were shown to the public for the first time as the third day of testimony in the Delphi case wrapped up.

www.indystar.com

Allen is facing two counts of murder and two counts of murder while kidnapping the girls. His long-awaited trial comes more than seven years after the teens' deaths and almost exactly two years since his arrest. The weekslong trial, one of the most controversial and highly publicized criminal cases in Indiana, is now expected to cost Carroll County $4.3 million ― roughly $200 for every county resident.

 

[Vern]

Just playing devil’s advocate here… I agree you need to know the time the crime took place in order to know what you need to move away from.

But if RA was the killer, he would know the time the murders took place as soon as they happened. So when he was questioned a couple days later, he knew then what time he needed to move away from in order to distance himself from the scene . He didn’t obtain the knowledge of the date of the crime after his 2017 interview but before his 2022 interviews and then adjust his timings in the 2022 interview.

So it doesn’t make sense to me to say that he has changed his time in 2022 in order to distance himself from the time of the murder. If he had committed the murders, he’d know he needed to distance himself straight away and would have done so in his 2017 interviews.

Don't forget though that RA knew that the crime scene and location of the girls' remains were well away from the bridge and that they were on RL's private property. He had zero idea at that time that LE could link their killings to having been kidnaped from the bridge.

At the time of DD's interview RA had no idea that he'd actually been filmed by the girls on their cellphone and therefore was definitively connected to them and their kidnapping from the bridge.

Like us, he may have though that image came from a trailcam. Notice that he didn't tell DD that he was actually the witness in the bridge photo whom they were seeking to talk to. He told them only that he had been at the trails and platform 1 of the bridge from 1330-1530 and didn't see the girls. You cannot see over and down into the crime scene bowl from platform 1 of the bridge. We know by BB testimony that that was impossible and that he must have seen the girls.

He didn't have to change his time in 2017. He only had to do that years later after it became wide knowledge that the pic came from Libby's camera and that, additionally, there was a whole crime-linking video of 'down the hill' occuring on the actual bridge itself as the beginning of the actual crime - to their kidnapper and killer.

 

[Poedelini]

Just playing devil’s advocate here… I agree you need to know the time the crime took place in order to know what you need to move away from.

But if RA was the killer, he would know the time the murders took place as soon as they happened. So when he was questioned a couple days later, he knew then what time he needed to move away from in order to distance himself from the scene . He didn’t obtain the knowledge of the date of the crime after his 2017 interview but before his 2022 interviews and then adjust his timings in the 2022 interview.

So it doesn’t make sense to me to say that he has changed his time in 2022 in order to distance himself from the time of the murder. If he had committed the murders, he’d know he needed to distance himself straight away and would have done so in his 2017 interviews.

Imo it was almost impossible to not say the exact time he was there because he saw people and people saw him.

 

[Woodberry]

Have we ever heard an estimate of how many people were thought to be on the trails that afternoon? Were there any other men on the trails that we know of?

 

[Salah11]

Have we ever heard an estimate of how many people were thought to be on the trails that afternoon? Were there any other men on the trails that we know of?

Only one man on the bridge dressed like the killer and that’s RA at the time in question. RA also didn’t see another men out on the bridge either I might add.

 

[Gigiky]

Only one man on the bridge dressed like the killer and that’s RA at the time in question. RA also didn’t see another men out on the bridge either I might add.

Maybe there wasn't another man on the bridge. Maybe down the hill though. JMO.

 

[AugustWest]

Snipped and carried over by me from the last thread, for focus of reply

@AugustWest
I understand the right of someone to confront their accusor(s) in court. The jury though is not RA's accusor(s). They're the individuals deciding his fate, passing judgement. I see no interpretation with them as accusers of RA therefore he shouldn't insert himself, nor should the Prosecution, in the jury's viewing of any admitted evidence they might need to review to come to judgement. Nobody/nothing gets to influence the jury in person after the case is handed to them. During trial lawyers, judge, defendant and the public can all influence just by facial expressions, attitude, body language, sounds, words, and they did just that while viewing evidence during trial. That possible influence should never be present after their deliberations start, JMO. They're suppose to be sequestered from any influences besides the evidence during deliberations.

@al66pine
"During the trial, you must not consume any alcohol or drugs which would affect your ability to hear the evidence fairly and impartially."*

No alcohol or drug consumption to affect the jury's impartiality but they must be compelled to see the defendant/his lawyers and the prosecutors and all the possible influence of their human sway while reviewing evidence during their deliberations? Just seems counterproductive to their objective discernment in seclusion after the case is handed to them for judgement. JMO

I understand it's all been litigated and interpreted into case law over the years, just seems beyond the rights of the defendant or prosecutors to even be in the presence of the jury until verdict or the reporting of the inability of them to reach one. AJMO as a layperson.

It doesn't seem you read what I linked or what I wrote. "To be confronted with the witnesses against him" has been interpreted by past courts to include the right of a defendant to be present when testimony and exhibits are presented to the jury at all times. A defendant has the right to be present at every stage of a trial's proceedings.

The reasoning behind allowing this is so that a defendant cannot later complain that his trial was undertaken by the government in secrecy.

 

[AugustWest]

The jury verdict is what it is. I am much more worried that criminal justice is slipping into a conspiratorial frame that plagues everything else these days. Till now it’s fine because even if people want to believe crazy things on the internet it didn’t effect trials. but i don’t think that is true anymore when we have defence teams who mount misinformation campaigns designed to influence the jury and undermine public trust in institutions.

There is a place to discuss the punitive nature of criminal justice but lt that does not answer the question of whether RA is guilty or not. And i suspect many of those upset about pretrial detention will simply move on to the next trial fiasco and forget all about this.

You continuously refer to this as a conspiracy while failing to mention that it was the FBI who first put forth the notion that some third party perpetrator(s) attached to some religious faction may have perpetrated the crime.

The defense didn't pull that theory from thin air.

 

[justtrish]

You continuously refer to this as a conspiracy while failing to mention that it was the FBI who first put forth the notion that some third party perpetrator(s) attached to some religious faction may have perpetrated the crime.

The defense didn't pull that theory from thin air.

No they didn't pull it from thin air, but those people were ruled out. The reason it would be a conspiracy now is because the idea they are in fact involved and the "real killers" would mean that LE just disregarded knowing they are connected and then pursued RA in order to let these Odinist go. That is where a conspiracy comes in. It isn't the fact that this was an angle that LE looked into at the beginning of this investigation. They looked into MANY people and theories. Those were ruled out and they moved on. Now the defense claiming that those people really did it and LE covered it up along with prison guards, prosecutors, the judge, etc. THAT would take a conspiracy.

IMO

 

[sunspun]

@BobSegall WHTR

11. Keep in mind: as we wait, the families of Libby, Abby & Richard Allen are waiting too. I’ve seen them in or around the courthouse every day of this trial, which is now entering its 4th week. They have all been incredibly kind & gracious during such an unimaginable situation.View attachment 544206

https://twitter.com/x/status/1855457288544235561

Do you know who the man wearing sunglasses is in the first photo of 4 people walking?

 

[AugustWest]

No they didn't pull it from thin air, but those people were ruled out. The reason it would be a conspiracy now is because the idea they are in fact involved and the "real killers" would mean that LE just disregarded knowing they are connected and then pursued RA in order to let these Odinist go. That is where a conspiracy comes in. It isn't the fact that this was an angle that LE looked into at the beginning of this investigation. They looked into MANY people and theories. Those were ruled out and they moved on. Now the defense claiming that those people really did it and LE covered it up along with prison guards, prosecutors, the judge, etc. THAT would take a conspiracy.

Link?

 

[Vern]

Maybe there wasn't another man on the bridge. Maybe down the hill though. JMO.

But the 'only man' on the bridge kidnapped them via the order "down the hill" to their deaths though; that = guilty.

 

[FrostedGlass]

It doesn't seem you read what I linked or what I wrote. "To be confronted with the witnesses against him" has been interpreted by past courts to include the right of a defendant to be present when testimony and exhibits are presented to the jury at all times. A defendant has the right to be present at every stage of a trial's proceedings.

The reasoning behind allowing this is so that a defendant cannot later complain that his trial was undertaken by the government in secrecy.

MOO
Thank you for the brief explanation.
It's really important for people to understand our rights.

 

[Vern]

No they didn't pull it from thin air, but those people were ruled out. The reason it would be a conspiracy now is because the idea they are in fact involved and the "real killers" would mean that LE just disregarded knowing they are connected and then pursued RA in order to let these Odinist go. That is where a conspiracy comes in. It isn't the fact that this was an angle that LE looked into at the beginning of this investigation. They looked into MANY people and theories. Those were ruled out and they moved on. Now the defense claiming that those people really did it and LE covered it up along with prison guards, prosecutors, the judge, etc. THAT would take a conspiracy.

I agree; it gets really old reading of how LE "focussed" on just one guy too .... RA. Quite a silly insinuation by some that these 214 Websleuths threads themselves prove wrong.

They've investigated and ruled out many people in this crime.

That didn't happen for RA because he is Bridge Guy.

IMO.

 

[Mamamerced]

Do you know who the man wearing sunglasses is in the first photo of 4 people walking?

He is Mike Patty, Libby's step-grandfather and Becky Patty's husband.

 

[Vern]

Link?

Not the OP ( @justtrish ), but:

_Order on Sept 3, 2024.pdf

drive.google.com