GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #218

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
mrjitty said:
very interesting and great analysis.

On your notes i fail to see how it is the Judge or the States fault if Ricks attorney decides not to turn up because reasons.

i have no idea how this procedure works but is it not the attorneys responsibility to file into the case?

i have no idea how the procedure for private counsel works

MOO
Click to expand...

There would not be an RA case file number established (such that attny Gibson could "file/announce appearance" in the system) prior to RA entering a plea.

It is the Court's responsibility to ensure defendants have counsel for arraignment hearings.
A public defender is provided if there's not private attorney. RA had hired a private attorney Oct 27th ... but he was represented by a public defender at his arraignment on Oct 28th.

Per the Motion to Correct Errors: Kathy had hired and paid $5K via VISA Attny Gibson Oct 27th, the day before RA's arraignment. That same day that Gibson was hired, Gibson formally notified Leazenby and McLeland of his representation of RA, and McLeland personally assisted and arranged jail visit with RA and Gibson told both Kathy and RA that RA would be arraigned and charged with murder the next day. Gibson on the phone with Kathy at 10 PM, yet Gibson was not at RA's arraignment the next day. (this info all from the MTCE)

That's odd.

At page 3/4 The MTCE states:

At about 10 p.m. on October 27, 2022, Mr. Gibson called Mrs. Allen to say he
would not be able to get Mr. Allen out of jail, because he was going to be charged
with two counts of murder the next day. Exhibit 1. On October 28, 2022, without Mr.
Gibson present, even though Mr. McLeland and Sheriff Leazenby both knew Mr.
Allen was represented by Mr. Gibson, Mr. Allen was charged with two counts of
murder, and Judge Diener held Mr. Allen’s initial hearing.
Click to expand...

No explanation is offered for Gibson's absence from RA's Oct 28th arraignment in the MTCE. However, IMO, the MTCE infers that Gibson's absence was not Gibson's nor RA's choice.

MTCE: RA was arraigned "without Mr. Gibson present even though Mr. McLeland & Sheriff Leazenby both knew Mr. Allen was represented by Gibson".

IIRC, there were extreme precautions (alias) with regard to RA's holding pre-arraignment.
RA's travel to the courthouse and his arraignment was likely a secure affair, private arraignment and booking "without Mr. Gibson present".

Did Gibson request a delay of the arraignment due to conflicts? Was it denied? Was Gibson not given the arraignment time?

The whole thing is odd.

In my view, RA did explain at the arraignment, when asked about his arrangements for representation, that he'd arranged for his own counsel. Also explained in (source) RA's handwritten plea to the Court a few days after arraignment stating when he said he had private counsel he had no idea the cost of a defense and his family's urgent need to upend their lives.

JMHO.
 
Last edited:
somequestions said:
I want to know if during the period of time when Richard Allen was confessing with genuine details, did anyone besides LE at his interrogation ever ask him the question: "Are you the person (bridge guy) as seen in Liberty German's phone video, still picture?" If they have a yes answer to that question, that would have been great evidence. Did an answer to that question ever come out at trial?

Sometimes on a test you guess the right answer. Maybe LE guessed the right answer in this case, I do not know.
Click to expand...
His lawyer has to be present for any questioning - maybe thisbthe answer to why his lawyers hardly ever visited him at Westville, to avoid him saying he wanted to formally confess.
 
Vern said:
RSBM,

And yet, the Defence did bring in Liebert into the trial to testify to this "unknown individual". This "3rd party" as it were.

Why, oh why, did they fail to take this angle at creating reasonable doubt towards RA - their client?

They had a chance ... and again failed to capitalize on it.

That sucks for their client.
Click to expand...
I think the reason the defense did not present evidence is because not being able to have a third-party defense changed how they approached their defense of Richard Allen.

For example, I have often wondered if there was any testimony as it relates to Richard Allen being seen walking past the Hoosier Harvest Store surveillance camera on 300 N shortly after SC claims she saw Richard Allen or someone who looks like him walking along 300 N at 3:57pm near the cemetery area.

I now remember something about the trial. The defense and specifically attorney Baldwin argued that Richard Allen was leaving around 1:30pm and not arriving. Therefore, they might not have wanted to argue a point that in their minds and the prosecution's mind does not matter. Since their client is the only person being considered, he needs to be gone from the area by the time the timeline begins with Abby and Libby going to the Monon High Bridge trail. Or else Richard Allen is the only one there in the same area at the same time to be able to commit the murders.
 
INfisherman said:
Regarding the SE end, the case was presented as the video was also evidence of a man forcing the girls down the hill. Other state witnesses were allowed to tell the jury what they thought they heard as well as who they thought was saying it, including the ISP officer who reviewed all of RAs confessions. No one testified as to hearing anyone else speak in the video, not that it’s significant to my opinion, but it’s worth noting that’s the testimony heard by the jurors.

While I don’t disagree that it’s possible someone could have approached or had been waiting at the SE end, there is no evidence or testimony of that happening. Regarding TLs account of a man around her mailbox, that was at 8:30A - he’d have to wait around, unseen by anyone else for what, 5 1/2 - 6 hours & never be seen by BW when he came home. I just find that hard to buy into. Had there been other witnesses testify they saw another man prior to or before RA arriving, then I believe there’s a possibility for more doubt to be introduced. That didn’t happen in the trial though.

MOO
Click to expand...
My whole theory revolves around the at least 6 minute gap between the photograph of Abigail Williams posted at 2:07pm and the Liberty German phone video taken at 2:13pm. I am basically saying Richard Allen left off the bridge and someone else came up from the southeast side, walked past Abby and Libby on the bridge to look down it for witnesses and then turned around to walk toward Abby and Libby to commit the abduction.

This person commits the murders and then leaves out the southeast side of the Monon High Bridge area and is never seen by any witnesses in muddy and bloody clothes. My theory asks to prove that SC really saw someone muddy and bloody walking down 300 N and passing the Hoosier Harvest Store surveillance camera shortly after SC claims she saw this person walking on 300 N at 3:57pm. Richard Allen claims in his confession he stayed off the trails when going back to his car.

It is a very unlikely theory to make because it is asking the jury to believe someone else was there that day at around the same time as Richard Allen who is completely unknown to the investigation because they were not seen by any witnesses due to coming into the area and leaving the same way. Yes, there is no evidence of this because this other person was never seen by anyone other than Abby or Libby.
 
somequestions said:
My whole theory revolves around the at least 6 minute gap between the photograph of Abigail Williams posted at 2:07pm and the Liberty German phone video taken at 2:13pm. I am basically saying Richard Allen left off the bridge and someone else came up from the southeast side, walked past Abby and Libby on the bridge to look down it for witnesses and then turned around to walk toward Abby and Libby to commit the abduction.

This person commits the murders and then leaves out the southeast side of the Monon High Bridge area and is never seen by any witnesses in muddy and bloody clothes. My theory asks to prove that SC really saw someone muddy and bloody walking down 300 N and passing the Hoosier Harvest Store surveillance camera shortly after SC claims she saw this person walking on 300 N at 3:57pm. Richard Allen claims in his confession he stayed off the trails when going back to his car.

It is a very unlikely theory to make because it is asking the jury to believe someone else was there that day at around the same time as Richard Allen who is completely unknown to the investigation because they were not seen by any witnesses due to coming into the area and leaving the same way. Yes, there is no evidence of this because this other person was never seen by anyone other than Abby or Libby.
Click to expand...
And this person deposited an unfired round with extraction marks consistent with RA's gun between the girls.

It isn't just that there is no evidence of this other person, it's that there is evidence linking RA to the murder scene. The video from Libby's phone, and the round from his gun.

The whole problem the defense has had from the beginning is that no one else can be placed at the scene, and their client can, by his own admission.

MOO
 
somequestions said:
My whole theory revolves around the at least 6 minute gap between the photograph of Abigail Williams posted at 2:07pm and the Liberty German phone video taken at 2:13pm. I am basically saying Richard Allen left off the bridge and someone else came up from the southeast side, walked past Abby and Libby on the bridge to look down it for witnesses and then turned around to walk toward Abby and Libby to commit the abduction.

This person commits the murders and then leaves out the southeast side of the Monon High Bridge area and is never seen by any witnesses in muddy and bloody clothes. My theory asks to prove that SC really saw someone muddy and bloody walking down 300 N and passing the Hoosier Harvest Store surveillance camera shortly after SC claims she saw this person walking on 300 N at 3:57pm. Richard Allen claims in his confession he stayed off the trails when going back to his car.

It is a very unlikely theory to make because it is asking the jury to believe someone else was there that day at around the same time as Richard Allen who is completely unknown to the investigation because they were not seen by any witnesses due to coming into the area and leaving the same way. Yes, there is no evidence of this because this other person was never seen by anyone other than Abby or Libby.
Click to expand...
Sure, you can theorize all you wish. You can say aliens did it if you wish. Without evidence, it doesn’t mean much in court, obviously. The defense tried this tactic with their eyewitnesses & it had zero impact on the jurors. The initial vote was 9 guilty & 3 undecided (no decision - doesn’t equate to not guilty).

IIRC, BB returned & never saw anyone else after she passed the girls. So how did RA leave the bridge, never see this 2nd man AND no one else see RA leaving the trails? Why would LG not record a video of this 2nd overdressed man the first time he passed them then do it when he came back?

In addition to @iamshadow21 ‘s reply above, no one else can get RA off the bridge.

So this mystery man, he crosses the creek TWICE & goes back towards where BW lives not knowing if anyone along 625 is coming or going & is seen by no one as people are coming home from work & is never observed on the security camera that caught BWs van? I hope he bought a lottery ticket as no one reported parked cars or wet people walking around the southern end of the trails & there’s more homes there than along 300N, IIRC.

I respect that you’re asking questions such as these but I do not believe jurors do this nor do I believe they are expected to do so. They go with what is given to them & decide if that is enough to convince all 12 of them of guilt or innocence. I feel if a jury were to consider whether the rest of the world could have in some unlikely manner been involved in the crime of which they’re deliberating, they’d all end up as hung juries & our streets would be full of some really bad folks.

JMO
 
Emma Peel said:
There would not be an RA case file number established (such that attny Gibson could "file/announce appearance" in the system) prior to RA entering a plea.
Click to expand...
RSBM

Pretty sure this is not correct. A case number is assigned so the case can be assigned & scheduled in the appropriate court & the judge attached to that court. Defendants don’t just get dragged out of jail & in front of a judge by sheriff’s deputies & enter their plea in a murder case. The prosecutor files paperwork for the charges & that’s when the case number is assigned by the clerk of the court. The hearing is scheduled & at that hearing is when the defendant enters his plea.

MOO
 

Attachments

INfisherman said:
Maybe Erica Morse told him about it.

MOO
Click to expand...

I am not getting this new GH conspiracy

So what if he was talking about the van? The thing 'only the killer could know" was the time of the arrival of the van causing the killer to cross the stream.

Of course the point here is the D want us to believe that somehow Dr Wala conspired with GH to inject that info into Ricks confession. Of course they have no evidence of this.

MOO
 
INfisherman said:
RSBM

Pretty sure this is not correct. A case number is assigned so the case can be assigned & scheduled in the appropriate court & the judge attached to that court. Defendants don’t just get dragged out of jail & in front of a judge by sheriff’s deputies & enter their plea in a murder case. The prosecutor files paperwork for the charges & that’s when the case number is assigned by the clerk of the court. The hearing is scheduled & at that hearing is when the defendant enters his plea.

MOO
Click to expand...

Right.

I think Vern has taken one for the team and revealed the shell game here.

The arraignment is a proceeding in open court. It wasn't secret. RA was represented at it by a public defender. Of course! Things that happen every day in America.

He saw private counsel the night before. Counsel was aware of arraignment the next day. Nothing prevented counsel from turning up and entering an appearance. It is not the job of the prosecutor to tell counsel to turn up. It is not the job of the court to get Gibson to turn up.

RA was represented at the hearing. Gibson still did not file into the case.

Where is the affidavit from Gibson complaining that he was prevented from appearing on the 28th?

As Vern points out, even if Gibson really was RAs counsel - for both the arraignment and the safekeeping, how is it the fault of the state they he decided not to present front and centre?

Remember that for any of this to matter, the D needs the lack of counsel at the safekeeper to be a critical issue. So how was the Judge to know this? But should there have been a public defender?

IMO Gibson is likely a red herring. The idea that the state and court would intentionally conspire to have the accused not represented in a hearing is wild to me - something that could obviously lead to the collapse of the case.

There does remain, IMO, the question of whether a public defender ought to have represented RA for the safekeeper - but i do not know if you actually have to have a defended hearing for these.

The real giveaway, IMO, is that they waited nearly 2 years to file this.
 
mrjitty said:
I am not getting this new GH conspiracy

So what if he was talking about the van? The thing 'only the killer could know" was the time of the arrival of the van causing the killer to cross the stream.

Of course the point here is the D want us to believe that somehow Dr Wala conspired with GH to inject that info into Ricks confession. Of course they have no evidence of this.

MOO
Click to expand...
I might take those accusations a bit more seriously if GH were saying things as statements rather than speculation such as, "What if…."’ "Maybe….". As he is doing in the video clip in the X post.

I’d also give it some consideration if GH were at the trial, seated directly behind NM, SD & JL, but we all know there was only 1 content creator seated directly behind any counselors & it wasn’t on the state’s side of the courtroom. But of course, the defense, as stated by JA during her interview with the esteemed Mottas, they had no idea there was such a presence out there on social media.

If you think about it Mr. J, does the defense have any evidence at all?

MOO
 
Last edited:
mrjitty said:
Right.

I think Vern has taken one for the team and revealed the shell game here.

The arraignment is a proceeding in open court. It wasn't secret. RA was represented at it by a public defender. Of course! Things that happen every day in America.

He saw private counsel the night before. Counsel was aware of arraignment the next day. Nothing prevented counsel from turning up and entering an appearance. It is not the job of the prosecutor to tell counsel to turn up. It is not the job of the court to get Gibson to turn up.

RA was represented at the hearing. Gibson still did not file into the case.

Where is the affidavit from Gibson complaining that he was prevented from appearing on the 28th?

As Vern points out, even if Gibson really was RAs counsel - for both the arraignment and the safekeeping, how is it the fault of the state they he decided not to present front and centre?

Remember that for any of this to matter, the D needs the lack of counsel at the safekeeper to be a critical issue. So how was the Judge to know this? But should there have been a public defender?

IMO Gibson is likely a red herring. The idea that the state and court would intentionally conspire to have the accused not represented in a hearing is wild to me - something that could obviously lead to the collapse of the case.

There does remain, IMO, the question of whether a public defender ought to have represented RA for the safekeeper - but i do not know if you actually have to have a defended hearing for these.

The real giveaway, IMO, is that they waited nearly 2 years to file this.
Click to expand...
I agree with every point. For me the giveaway was the defense avoiding the obvious - ask Gibson via email what dates did he represent RA. Then Gibson signs a sworn affidavit as does RA. Those 3 things were missing. Instead, what you have is a bunch of paperwork & emails showing communication/payment occurring before the hearing on 28OC22 & KA giving a sworn affidavit that she hired an attorney but nothing definitely showing the representation was intended to be beyond the 27th. No one is really lying but there is zero proof of representation beyond the night RA met with Gibson.

I feel that meeting with Gibson on 27OC22 was a consultation & that was when RA learned how expensive a private attorney would be for his case, as he later outlined in his handwritten letter to the judge posted earlier upthread by Vern.

MOO
 
INfisherman said:
RSBM

Pretty sure this is not correct. A case number is assigned so the case can be assigned & scheduled in the appropriate court & the judge attached to that court. Defendants don’t just get dragged out of jail & in front of a judge by sheriff’s deputies & enter their plea in a murder case. The prosecutor files paperwork for the charges & that’s when the case number is assigned by the clerk of the court. The hearing is scheduled & at that hearing is when the defendant enters his plea.

MOO
Click to expand...

Right. None of this is secret. Gibson knew all this.
 
INfisherman said:
I might take those accusations a bit more seriously if GH were saying things as statements rather than speculation such as, "What if…."’ "Maybe….". As he is doing in the video clip in the X post.

I’d also give it some consideration if GH were at the trial, seated directly behind NM, SD & JL, but we all know there was only 1 content creator seated directly behind any counselors & it wasn’t on the state’s side of the courtroom. But of course, the defense, as stated by JA during her interview with the esteemed Mottas, they had no idea there was such a presence out there on social media.

If you think about it Mr. J, does the defense have any evidence at all?

MOO
Click to expand...

The other part that makes no sense is that if GH and Dr W were engaged in fitting up RA, why would they post about it on social media?

I feel like these conspiracies eventually become self-referential where the answers to the case are not found in the trial evidence, but rather in some guys social media posts, and then supposedly those social media posts are now the evidence that should be filed in court ...

But of course the motion to correct doesn't contain half these things - the defence hasn't filed any pleadings about GH.

MOO
 
mrjitty said:
The other part that makes no sense is that if GH and Dr W were engaged in fitting up RA, why would they post about it on social media?

I feel like these conspiracies eventually become self-referential where the answers to the case are not found in the trial evidence, but rather in some guys social media posts, and then supposedly those social media posts are now the evidence that should be filed in court ...

But of course the motion to correct doesn't contain half these things - the defence hasn't filed any pleadings about GH.

MOO
Click to expand...
It’s more interesting if there’s a deeper story to it compared to what actually occurred.

What’s ironic & pleasing to know is that idea comes from Holeman, the demon seed of the conspiracy.

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tricia
  • Locked
GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #217
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
72K
Sillybilly
Sillybilly
Tricia
  • Locked
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #199
62 63 64
Replies
1K
Views
61K
Tricia
Tricia
Tricia
  • Locked
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #198
56 57 58
Replies
1K
Views
56K
Knitty
Knitty
Tricia
  • Locked
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #212
44 45 46
Replies
914
Views
52K
Tricia
Tricia
Tricia
  • Locked
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #211
53 54 55
Replies
1K
Views
60K
Knitty
Knitty

Members online

... and 159 more.
Total: 793 (members: 160, guests: 633)

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
633
Total visitors
793
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
625,663
Messages
18,507,846
Members
240,832
Latest member
bibthebab
Back
Top