GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #217

[Boxer]

He has survived almost 4 months in Cass Co. jail, which is the one that agreed to accept him way back in April 2023.

If it was all about his safety, what changed to motivate this judge to release him to Cass?

MOO the initial danger of constant death threats diminished over time.
Not sure why not Cass in the beginning, maybe the segregation there wasnt adequate at the tine.

 

[TTF14]

He has survived almost 4 months in Cass Co. jail, which is the one that agreed to accept him way back in April 2023.

If it was all about his safety, what changed to motivate this judge to release him to Cass?

In my opinion, it was never about his safety, but about "coaxing" him to confess, and Westville, specificallyl, was the place to get that done. The way they went about it is, in my opinion, shameful, but....it worked. They got what they wanted. Some even say the ends justify the means, and this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

 

[INfisherman]

When did RA’s attorneys first request JG to vacate the safekeeping order? Was it earlier than 30JUL24? If not, why?

 

[INfisherman]

Exactly what would that "hot stove" be?
I'm at a loss to imagine why neither one would want to go there.

The geofencing was the hot stove.

Because it didn’t do either side any good to bring in that data in front of & may further confuse the jury. It only proved RA lied about using his cell phone but at the same time it potentially removes him from the bridge (only according to that data, not by RA’s own words). The state has to decide which may be more convincing to a jury & weigh if it’s worth the risk(s) of introducing that evidence. They already have RA putting himself on the bridge. What’s proving he lied about using his cell going to add to the state convincing a jury he is guilty of his charges? Not much, IMO & evidently also the state’s opinion.

It also did nothing for the D because the other phones were people who weren’t involved in the crimes, nor ever really suspected (arguing couple & older man in flannel shirt). The D still called them anyway & asked them what they saw & heard. It was never made clear by MSM reports (that I read) why the D called them - I guess to testify they didn’t hear screams trying to imply the girls weren’t heard therefore hoping that equated to them not being at the CS?

The state realized it wasn’t worth the risk of introducing potential doubt or confusion to the jury, so they asked for the cell data to be disallowed. Don’t open doors which may allow the other team to use it as an advantage, a common strategy used by both prosecuting & defense attorneys.

ETA MOO, clarity.

 

[FrostedGlass]

MOO the initial danger of constant death threats diminished over time.
Not sure why not Cass in the beginning, maybe the segregation there wasnt adequate at the tine.

They said they didn't want him but would take him if necessary and that they could keep him safe.

 

[FrostedGlass]

prison is not meant to be a 5 star hotel.

Its a punishment.
For being a bad person for hurting others.
To keep society safe.

They get fed, exercised, a clean bed, education and recreational activities.

The basic necessities of life are met.

Here's the thing, I see RA treatment in jail as extremely fair and special actually.
Indulged far more than everyone else.
Isolation gets taken out of context selectively,
it is for the prisoners own safety as well as the rest of the place.

moo

Prison is for people who are found guilty.
Jail is for pre-trial detainees who are presumed in the eyes of the law.
MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

When did RA’s attorneys first request JG to vacate the safekeeping order? Was it earlier than 30JUL24? If not, why?

Here is the first one:

Motion Filed Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 04/05/2023​

​

 

[al66pine]

"both parties agreed not to touch the hot stove"

Exactly what would that "hot stove" be?
I'm at a loss to imagine why neither one would want to go there.

@Frosted Glass
See the post just above by @mrjitty, explaining the particulars in this case.

My post was a compliment re mrjitty's "hot stove" phrasing, which was new to me.

@mrjitty. TYVM.

editted to spell mrjitty correctly.

 

[mrjitty]

Exactly what would that "hot stove" be?
I'm at a loss to imagine why neither one would want to go there.

The geofencing was the hot stove.

Because it didn’t do either side any good to bring in that data in front of & may further confuse the jury. It only proved RA lied about using his cell phone but at the same time it potentially removes him from the bridge (only according to that data, not by RA’s own words). The state has to decide which may be more convincing to a jury & weigh if it’s worth the risk(s) of introducing that evidence. They already have RA putting himself on the bridge. What’s proving he lied about using his cell going to add to the state convincing a jury he is guilty of his charges? Not much, IMO & evidently also the state’s opinion.

It also did nothing for the D because the other phones were people who weren’t involved in the crimes, nor ever really suspected (arguing couple & older man in flannel shirt). The D still called them anyway & asked them what they saw & heard. It was never made clear by MSM reports (that I read) why the D called them - I guess to testify they didn’t hear screams trying to imply the girls weren’t heard therefore hoping that equated to them not being at the CS?

The state realized it wasn’t worth the risk of introducing potential doubt or confusion to the jury, so they asked for the cell data to be disallowed. Don’t open doors which may allow the other team to use it as an advantage, a common strategy used by both prosecuting & defense attorneys.

ETA MOO, clarity.

I largely agree with @INfisherman - especially as to why the D didn't actually want to lead this evidence, as it would highlight RAs phone not being there

With the Prosecution the issue might be more fundamental i.e. there is simply issues with the data including they don't have tower data for his phone because 5 years later it had been deleted. So they prefer not to call SA Horan and the defence also doesn't want to call him

I've seen this before where a critical 911 call was not exhibited because <reasons> so one suspects there was some problem with the evidence and both sides preferred not to comment on it - likely in some pretrial agreement.

 

[INfisherman]

Here is the first one:

Motion Filed Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 04/05/2023​

​

That is not to vacate - that is to modify, which was their request to have RA moved due to alleged unfair treatment at Westville & supposed declining mental health. RA was initially placed at Westville by INDOC, not a judge. The judge (Diener) simply ordered the transfer from Carroll County to INDOC. The defense got their wish with the modified safekeeping request & he was sent to Sullivan county, again by INDOC, some 200 miles away. Once again, this was not satisfactory for the defense. They did not ask for the order to be vacated until the July 2024 hearing, that I can find.

Nothing illegal occurred. The state is allowed to hold pre-trial detainees in prison if necessary as long as INDOC reviews the detainee’s condition every 30 days. I have yet to see any claims or evidence that those reviews did not occur. I can only assume if he was held in the prison wrongfully, the defense would have filed motions stating prior cases where this was ruled illegal or not allowed in other courts/cases.

MOO

 

[gremlin444]

In my opinion, it was never about his safety, but about "coaxing" him to confess, and Westville, specificallyl, was the place to get that done. The way they went about it is, in my opinion, shameful, but....it worked. They got what they wanted. Some even say the ends justify the means, and this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

In your opinion is this an active "coaxing" or a passive "coaxing?"

As in, are you saying the living conditions themselves (passive) were used to get him in a mental state where he would spontaneously confess?

Or are you saying that then, once in that environment and living condition, it led to a desired breakdown of his mental state and then he had direct verbal interactions with personnel in the prison trying to convince him to confess or making him promises (active coaxing)?

If it was active coaxing, what was the motivation given to him to confess? Better conditions, etc?

I would think that had Richard reported active coaxing and/or incentives offered to confess to his DT, we would heard plenty about that in pretrial motions and hearings, much less than the trial itself.

 

[Warwick7]

Prison is for people who are found guilty.
Jail is for pre-trial detainees who are presumed in the eyes of the law.
MOO

Must not be, since the Judge ordered his placement there.

 

[Willow Knight]

If it was all about his safety, what changed to motivate this judge to release him to Cass?

RSBM

IMO, his actions changed. He confessed and still had family support.

IMO, things like eating regular food, bathing, therapy, medication.

When he was sent for safe keeping his safety was a concern. Let's think about what he was doing and what he was saying.

Eating unhealthy waste, covering himself with the unhealthy waste, harming himself with a spork.
Refusing to eat healthy meals at regular meal times.

Statements and actions were a huge concern.
And he said he wouldn't do that again.

 

[INfisherman]

I largely agree with @INfisherman - especially as to why the D didn't actually want to lead this evidence, as it would highlight RAs phone not being there

With the Prosecution the issue might be more fundamental i.e. there is simply issues with the data including they don't have tower data for his phone because 5 years later it had been deleted. So they prefer not to call SA Horan and the defence also doesn't want to call him

I've seen this before where a critical 911 call was not exhibited because <reasons> so one suspects there was some problem with the evidence and both sides preferred not to comment on it - likely in some pretrial agreement.

Thanks, mrjitty.

There was also the potential issues of locational accuracy based upon the type of cell signal being utilized for both legal teams to consider. There is always error in positioning using signals, & the amount of error is apparently determined by the type of signal being utilized by the phone, outlined in the state’s response to the 3rd Franks Motion (see screenshot below).


Off topic, but an everyday example: I encounter position/location errors all the time using waypoints on my GPS/sonar units (fish finders) when out fishing in my bass boat on larger lakes. We often have to use the sonar to get back to the precise location of an underwater feature holding fish because the waypoint isn’t 100% accurate. The waypoint just gets us close (within feet or yards).

 

[somequestions]

I am going to wait until sentencing on December 20th. Since Richard Allen is now convicted, I wonder whether he will apologize or proclaim his innocence when he is allowed to speak? I think he should speak at this point, because why would you not take that opportunity if it does not affect your case? Maybe a lawyer could add more opinion about whether speaking at sentencing is a good or bad idea.

All the other cases, whether Murdaugh or Kohberger(case has yet to be decided) or any other case, I thought the defendant was guilty. Maybe it is because this case is so strange, and the killer acted so strange is what makes it so unique. For example, suppose for a second Richard Allen was faking his symptoms regarding psychosis. If he was only acting mentally unstable, would he not have been smart enough to realize that confessing with details only the killer would know would not help his case?

I think Richard Allen should speak at his December 20th sentencing and either admit to the killings or proclaim his innocence. I think in a case like this staying silent when there is no reason to anymore is going to make it appear he is guilty, even if he is not. I know a jury found him guilty. An appeal could take years, and after December 20th, this case will probably fade away like all the other cases before it.

 

[INfisherman]

I am going to wait until sentencing on December 20th. Since Richard Allen is now convicted, I wonder whether he will apologize or proclaim his innocence when he is allowed to speak? I think he should speak at this point, because why would you not take that opportunity if it does not affect your case? Maybe a lawyer could add more opinion about whether speaking at sentencing is a good or bad idea.

All the other cases, whether Murdaugh or Kohberger or any other case, I thought the defendant was guilty. Maybe it is because this case is so strange, and the killer acted so strange is what makes it so unique. For example, suppose for a second Richard Allen was faking his symptoms regarding psychosis. If he was only acting mentally unstable, would he not have been smart enough to realize that confessing with details only the killer would know would not help his case?

I think Richard Allen should speak at his December 20th sentencing and either admit to the killings or proclaim his innocence. I think in a case like this staying silent when there is no reason to anymore is going to make it appear he is guilty, even if he is not. I know a jury found him guilty. An appeal could take years, and after December 20th, this case will probably fade away like all the other cases before it.

Not a lawyer, but if he plans to appeal, I don’t see him doing either any speaking or apologizing, particularly since he plead not guilty. I don’t disagree with what you feel RA should do at all. I just do not believe he has the testicular fortitude to do so given his current circumstances & what he’s demonstrated up to this point. Later in life? Maybe, but by then, IMO, it’s too late & that’s just a fear that comes from impending death.

I do see where some people may have a hard time with the amount of circumstantial evidence. I am of the opinion that’s where many people have a wary feeling concerning guilt. It may simply lie in how a person feels about reasonable doubt & how they interpret it. That & the lack of DNA evidence pointing to RA. People were found guilty of murder prior to the advent of DNA evidence so I’m not sure why today it is such a "must" in the eyes of some.

To answer your question regarding how smart he may or may not be, just look at what he said and did prior to even being arrested. Smart killers usually don’t talk to police IMO. You may feel or see that differently & that’s not right or wrong. He had his chance to get away with it but he opened his mouth for whatever reason(s).

His reactions to victim impact statements, if allowed, should be quite interesting. IMO that will be quite telling & possibly a peep as to who & what he is really, for those who don’t already have an inclination.

 

[somequestions]

In my opinion, it was never about his safety, but about "coaxing" him to confess, and Westville, specificallyl, was the place to get that done. The way they went about it is, in my opinion, shameful, but....it worked. They got what they wanted. Some even say the ends justify the means, and this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

I agree with you. Also, I understand not allowing citizens who had alibis to not be discussed during trial, but his defense could not even discuss persons of interest(like RL and KK) and theories that LE themselves looked into.

 

[k-mac]

In my opinion, it was never about his safety, but about "coaxing" him to confess, and Westville, specificallyl, was the place to get that done. The way they went about it is, in my opinion, shameful, but....it worked. They got what they wanted. Some even say the ends justify the means, and this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

RA was under zero duress when confessing.
Not one time was he confessing to LAW ENFORCEMENT.
He was talking to those he loved and felt safe with to purge his conscience.

We have heard( reported to us via those in court) the confessions to his wife mother and dr.

The conversations are extremely rational, he never once says he is under duress, uncomfortable etc.
He asks very logical thoughtful questions to his loved ones about what he is telling them.
Seeking and needing their support no matter what.

I think its a stretch the poor RA was tricked and absolutely won't go anywhere on appeal.

moo

 

[TTF14]

RA was under zero duress when confessing.
Not one time was he confessing to LAW ENFORCEMENT.
He was talking to those he loved and felt safe with to purge his conscience.

We have heard( reported to us via those in court) the confessions to his wife mother and dr.

The conversations are extremely rational, he never once says he is under duress, uncomfortable etc.
He asks very logical thoughtful questions to his loved ones about what he is telling them.
Seeking and needing their support no matter what.

I think its a stretch the poor RA was tricked and absolutely won't go anywhere on appeal.

moo

Like I said, this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

 

[k-mac]

Like I said, this is where we have a huge divide in our belief systems regarding how human beings (especially pre-conviction inmates) should be treated while imprisoned.

As always, this is my opinion.

The law is the law.
If the laws are being followed and upheld then that's the way it is supposed to be.

The law isn't a belief system.
The judicial system is a justice and punishment system for bad people.

A deterrent for bad people to be good people and keeping the deplorable monsters/killers out of society.

There does not appear to be any legal breaches of RA rights leading up to his trial.

moo