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

[Emma Peel]

I don't recall saying Defendant's right to be heard with regard to safekeeping are different if he had private counsel. My posts are in response to those who insist on inferring from the MTCE re safeguarding exhibits that attorney Gibson was hired to represent RA and subsequently kept from attending the hearing because he was not given the pertinent information about the alleged secret hearing. My point is, I cannot infer that based on the flimsy evidence produced by the defense to illustrate that alleged failure to inform Gibson. I may very well have had a different opinion had the defense produced with their motion on this topic an affidavit from attorney Gibson swearing that he was prevented from attending the hearing because the proceeding was kept hidden from him. But they didn't and what they did produce in the form of exhibits to support their argument falls short for me.

View attachment 561015
None of which, to me, illustrates Gibson was excluded from the safekeeping hearing. The questions posed to him by defense counsel don't even touch on the subject of the hearing on October 28th. Which naturally makes me question WHY? I think Gibson not being there and no other counsel being there is the crux of the defense's argument on this topic, is it not?

ETA and if it is NOT then why is any of this in the motion in the first place?

Thank you for explaining. It is confusing.
Perhaps one point of confusion is that the Motion focuses on the Nov 3 hearing (safekeeping) and not the Oct 28th hearing (arraignment) - where bail hearing was set for June, 2023.)

(see BBM above, which I've bolded just to be certain we're on the same page...)
IMO ...Yes, agree that Gibson not being at the Nov 3rd safekeeping procedure, RA not being there, and no other counsel repping RA being there ... is the crux of the defense's argument.
The motion states RA had no representation at that safekeeping procedure Nov 3.

It appears (see the Q/As as to Gibson that you copied above) Gibson confirms he did not receive notice with regard to the Nov 3rd safekeeping proceeding. IMO, that's the point made with that exhibit.

The Motion argues that that the Court and the State conducted the safekeeping proceeding where RA was not present and "was deprived of counsel at the safekeeping "proceeding"", "was entitled to be represented by counsel", but he was "unrepresented during that proceeding".

(Quite a few other technicalities are raised, including the fact that Leanzeby (who signs the safekeeping motion) provided no affidavits supporting the claims as to RA's perilous holding conditions, and the fact that Leanzeby had no standing (via his the county jurisdiction) to make the motion b/c he'd already moved RA out of Carroll County and into White County's custody, and that Judge Diener consulted with Leanzeby ex-parte and actually helped drafted the request, so it was improper for Diener to rule on it.)

(The 6:36 pm marked email Gibson sent to McLeland is when Gibson first advised McLeland he was repping RA. Note, 6:36 pm is after biz hours. Email states Gibson had still not met with RA; Gibson couldn't find RA. Gibson called Kathy at 10 PM after his RA visit (Kathy affidavit). Gibson's whereabouts or reasons for his absence at the Oct 28 arraignment hearing or whether he was advised as to time/place in advance, or if/when Gibson contacted Court for info ... is unknown. Discussion on that point is speculative. The whereabouts of Gibson for the Oct 28 hearing is not detailed in the motion; IMO, we've wondered about it only b/c the Gibson/McLeland contacts the evening of Oct 27th are described in the narrative.)

Noting again that the afternoon of Oct 28th was the first public announcement that an arrest in the Delphi Murders had occurred, PCA sealed, RA under alias. RA was moved silently from Carroll Cty to White Cty after arraignment, and Nov 3rd to Westville.

JMHO

Sources:
Arrest made in Delphi murders of Libby German and Abby Williams, sources say



MTCE - Google Drive

 

[somequestions]

That’s fine with me, we don’t have to agree.

I understand you weren’t speaking of other cases or other defendants & I believe you overlook or miss my point. I was applying your assertions about doubting guilt to juries & verdicts in other murder trials. Is that not reasonable based on what you’re implying with this murder case? You mention several times that what a known liar says or confesses as having great importance on your reasons for doubting guilt. Why do the words of a known liar carry such weight? Is that very reasonable? It doesn’t seem to be to me, but at the same time I suppose that makes neither of us right or wrong & just consider those questions as rhetorical as it serves no purpose to answer them since you’ve made your opinion clear after much discussion.

I disagree with your theories lacking evidence or credible testimony & feel the state presented enough of both to show RA was the only man there & was the person who committed the murders. The defense with their "new evidence" which they pulled from the pile of discovery only bolsters that BW arrived home "around 2:30" and by their own words, no other vehicles seen for quite some time before or after the van entering the frame. Also no muddy or bloody guys seen in that footage, which is around the SE area where evidently there could have been half the Odinists &/or meth drug kingpins in Carroll county lying in wait, like RA was at the other end. 12 minutes does nothing to change RAs whereabouts or deeds. The phone movement is not indicative of an exact time of death nor was it ever presented as such at trial. As I recall it was around the time the girls were killed as NM was careful not to give a specific choreography of how the events or murders specifically played out after DTH.

Doesn’t matter - the legal arguments are over, the verdict was decided & the convicted murderer is where he belongs & will likely remain.

Take care.

In the Delphi Debrief from WTHR, the attorney consulting said that reasonable doubt is being able to go to sleep at night knowing that you made the right decision. If I was on the jury, I could not go to sleep at night knowing I made the right decision. I definitely could not go to sleep at night with the information that came out in the motion to correct errors. The 12 minutes matters to me.

It does not matter anymore as I was not on the jury, and they have made their decision.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Thank you for explaining. It is confusing.
Perhaps one point of confusion is that the Motion focuses on the Nov 3 hearing (safekeeping) and not the Oct 28th hearing (arraignment) - where bail hearing was set for June, 2023.)

(see BBM above, which I've bolded just to be certain we're on the same page...)
IMO ...Yes, agree that Gibson not being at the Nov 3rd safekeeping procedure, RA not being there, and no other counsel repping RA being there ... is the crux of the defense's argument.
The motion states RA had no representation at that safekeeping procedure Nov 3.

It appears (see the Q/As as to Gibson that you copied above) Gibson confirms he did not receive notice with regard to the Nov 3rd safekeeping proceeding. IMO, that's the point made with that exhibit.

The Motion argues that that the Court and the State conducted the safekeeping proceeding where RA was not present and "was deprived of counsel at the safekeeping "proceeding"", "was entitled to be represented by counsel", but he was "unrepresented during that proceeding".

(Quite a few other technicalities are raised, including the fact that Leanzeby (who signs the safekeeping motion) provided no affidavits supporting the claims as to RA's perilous holding conditions, and the fact that Leanzeby had no standing (via his the county jurisdiction) to make the motion b/c he'd already moved RA out of Carroll County and into White County's custody, and that Judge Diener consulted with Leanzeby ex-parte and actually helped drafted the request, so it was improper for Diener to rule on it.)

(The 6:36 pm marked email Gibson sent to McLeland is when Gibson first advised McLeland he was repping RA. Note, 6:36 pm is after biz hours. Email states Gibson had still not met with RA; Gibson couldn't find RA. Gibson called Kathy at 10 PM after his RA visit (Kathy affidavit). Gibson's whereabouts or reasons for his absence at the Oct 28 arraignment hearing or whether he was advised as to time/place in advance, or if/when Gibson contacted Court for info ... is unknown. Discussion on that point is speculative. The whereabouts of Gibson for the Oct 28 hearing is not detailed in the motion; IMO, we've wondered about it only b/c the Gibson/McLeland contacts the evening of Oct 27th are described in the narrative.)

Noting again that the afternoon of Oct 28th was the first public announcement that an arrest in the Delphi Murders had occurred, PCA sealed, RA under alias. RA was moved silently from Carroll Cty to White Cty after arraignment, and Nov 3rd to Westville.

JMHO

Sources:
Arrest made in Delphi murders of Libby German and Abby Williams, sources say

View attachment 561052

MTCE - Google Drive
View attachment 561038

Thank you for an explanation that's easy to understand.

 

[INfisherman]

In the Delphi Debrief from WTHR, the attorney consulting said that reasonable doubt is being able to go to sleep at night knowing that you made the right decision. If I was on the jury, I could not go to sleep at night knowing I made the right decision. I definitely could not go to sleep at night with the information that came out in the motion to correct errors. The 12 minutes matters to me.

It does not matter anymore as I was not on the jury, and they have made their decision.

Why would the MTCE cause you to lose sleep? That’s only what the defense claims occurred, it’s not undeniable fact or truth, much like the 12 minutes which are of the utmost importance to you now. The other half of the story will be in the state’s response to the MTCE, but it sounds like you’re taking the defense at their word & have already come to conclusions which is the equivalent of hearing half a trial as a juror & doesn’t sound very open minded towards the state or reasonable.

As always, I respect your opinions I just don’t agree with them in this instance at all.

Sleep well, you have nothing about which to be concerned regarding the jury’s decision nor those 12 minutes.

MOO

 

[Emma Peel]

maybe RA should move for ineffective assistance of counsel. he paid 5k on a retainer, met with his lawyer in prison then the guy forgets to turn up to the arraignment and never files into the case???? I mean did G just get his 5k and forget all about representing his client who was just charged with murder????

Seems pretty negligent!

If true???

MOO

The idea that RA was secretly arraigned and this was concealed from Gibson makes no sense when the filing itself makes clear Gibson knew RA would be charged the next day. Nothing was stopping Gibson from contacting the Clerk and proceeding per normal.

Does it say anywhere that Gibson was deceived in this way? That a secret arraignment was scheduled so that he would be tricked?

There seems to be some suggestion that it was the State's job to tell the clerk about Gibson to ensure that he turned up to represent his own client.

is that SOP?

see time on the email below (from MTCE).
First contact w/ McLeland was an email Gibson sent at 6:37 pm Oct 28.
Note attached to McLeland email is "email to Carroll County Sherriff re: representation"

Gibson emails very late, after-hours, the retained counsel of a murder defendant asks the DA (see email below - these are quotes) "I called the jail and they told me he is not there", "do you know his whereabouts", "is he in police custody?" and "I want to confirm any interrogation is halted".

SOP?
Here's the SOP: 230 years, the statutory burden (the bill of rights), the responsibility to ensure the rights of a citizen in custody/awaiting trial is on the State, the entrusted Power for the People.

So. The DA. The Sherriff. Both servants of the State and the Power, sworn to uphold, ethically bound.

I feel certain that if McCleland knew date/time/place of arraignment being held imminently (in the next 15 hours), he would inform RA's counsel Gibson (maybe after checking that Gibson is the real thing) immediately. It's his job and ethical duty. No games. That's my thinking. JMHO

Secrets!
Is being in holding under an alias a secret?
Jail staff did not know "RA" was in jail due to alias.
Does sealing a PCA ... keep probable cause a secret?
Its been well established the State (and Court) were sealing and secreting almost everything RA related at the time. The State explained: they were still looking at others involved.

JMHO

 

[INfisherman]

i find it odd the state code mentions nothing about inmates being entitled to counsel. One would think they’d double down & make sure that base was covered & blatantly obvious, in the same location (code) for ease of understanding.

Then again, and I’m no lawyer, just because the defense’s lips are moving doesn’t mean they’re telling the complete story surrounding a safekeeping hearing…..and 2+ years after the fact at that. One just lets a constitutional violation sit around, unchecked for years & puts their client’s freedom at risk by going through a complete trial? That sure is an odd way of lawyering.

As thorough as NM presented his case at trial & he knew full well all eyes were on him or going to be at the time, it’s kind of hard to swallow that he wouldn’t make sure all i’s were dotted & t’s crossed from the get go. It’s especially hard to swallow if one is to believe this was all an orchestrated railroading.

We shall see.

MOO

 

[Boxer]

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.

Incompetent counsel appeal.

 

[INfisherman]

Light bulb time, I believe.

Let’s take this safekeeping code & apply it using a valid but slightly different scenario.

So, if we are to believe what the defense is presenting, then we must believe if an inmate were presenting an immediate danger to himself - oh, let’s see - suicide, for example. Then the sheriff, prosecuting attorney, defendant or his counselor (not applicable in this example), attorney general or court (judge) must not render any decisions until the inmate, who is threatening to kill himself, has legal representation at the safekeeping hearing.

So, everyone must stand around, shrugging their shoulders & watch this inmate commit suicide while his counselor waits for his BMW to warm up & get to the courthouse? Nah, ain’t buying it.

The state will show RAs presence in the county jail presented a threat to others & this will be the end of it. The defense is misrepresenting the nature & purpose of the code. I do not believe this is a constitutional violation & they’ve known this from day 1 or they would have been all over it.

Ain’t buying what they’re selling. Another lemon. Get the manure shovel out folks, this belongs out in the pasture.

MOO

 

[Vaderman]

Listening to Doug Carter's interview with the Murder Sheet and this crushed me:

Question: Are you okay?
Answer: Oh, no, no. No. I'm not okay.

The Delphi Murders: First Person: Doug Carter Part Two

Podcast Episode · Murder Sheet · 01/28/2025 · 45m

podcasts.apple.com

~44:00 mark

 

[Emma Peel]

Thanks for posting the link. Who is behind the "might be a decent rumor" from at least 9 months ago? Gotta give him credit... it was a very decent rumor; almost like the person had actual knowledge.

From the transcript:
2:12:47 mm
Allen is at the he he confessed to different Witnesses one of them was a
psychologist and I don't
know know so yeah and the thing is is this is just a rumor okay this is a
rumor you know might be a decent rumor but it's a rumor nevertheless okay so
what if you know Richard Allen at the crime scene when he told one of his
psychologists that maybe he saw something specific while he was at the crime scene
and why he sped things along and ran away for example what if you saw
maybe uh K Weber's son driving home in his van and told the psychologist that
exact thing and it shown that his van did show up exactly at that time
wouldn't that be interesting would that be an interesting thing yeah what if he said while he was
at the crime scene he saw the van and he got nervous and he killed him and he ran away and it happens to be K Weber's son
perhaps would wouldn't that be crazy yeah wouldn't that be absolutely
nuts if he actually had a specific fact that nobody else would really even know that he was telling the
psychologists H I think that'd be kind of interesting wouldn't it

So.
GH had RA's psychologists info prior to trial.
"Good to know."
Says the Appellate Team.
JMHO

 

[steeltowngirl]

Incompetent counsel appeal.

I thought the opportunity to allege ineffective counsel went out the window when the Supreme Court allowed reinstatement of B&R?

 

[steeltowngirl]

So.
GH and YouTubers had crime scene photos prior to trial.
“Good to know.”
Says the Appellate Court.
And the families of Libby and Abby.

jmo

 

[Emma Peel]

I thought the opportunity to allege ineffective counsel went out the window when the Supreme Court allowed reinstatement of B&R?

You're correct. Incompetent counsel was the term used at the RA SCION hearing.


Caught my ear as well but ... ai-clarified, fwiw

• Incompetent Counsel: Describes a lawyer’s general lack of skill or knowledge, which may or may not affect the outcome of the case.
• Ineffective Counsel: Is a specific legal determination that a lawyer’s poor performance deprived the defendant of their constitutional right to a fair trial, requiring both deficient performance and prejudice to the defendant.

Rozzi interview on Motta - he was asked about it. He indicated (paraphrased) defense attorneys are amenable to the ineffective counsel argument if it's going to be an effective appellate argument that gets the client justice; that it means the counsel made a critical error that would likely change the verdict and in such a case it should be corrected.

JMHO

 

[Boxer]

I thought the opportunity to allege ineffective counsel went out the window when the Supreme Court allowed reinstatement of B&R?

I dont know the legalities. But good.

 

[Emma Peel]

So.
GH and YouTubers had crime scene photos prior to trial.
“Good to know.”
Says the Appellate Court.
And the families of Libby and Abby.

jmo

Supreme Court already heard that one, right?
JMHO

 

[steeltowngirl]

Supreme Court already heard that one, right?
JMHO

Yeah. SCOIN is probably tired of hearing about RA and his counsel. But they may get a Round 2 of the circus known as the Delphi case.

jmo

 

[Emma Peel]

Yeah. SCOIN is probably tired of hearing about RA and his counsel. But they may get a Round 2 of the circus known as the Delphi case.

jmo

It's possible. Hope not.
It will be interesting to see if Wala's unethical behavior, breaking privilege, breaking into prison records, etc. makes a short list. "It's the psychologist" is so Agatha Christie. JMHO

I just realized we might be chatting right past each other. It's not intentional. all the respect.



Delphi Murders Trial: Day 11 | Prison psychologist says Allen made multiple confessions

 

[steeltowngirl]

It's possible. Hope not.
It will be interesting to see if Wala's unethical behavior, breaking privilege, breaking into prison records, etc. makes a short list. "It's the psychologist" is so Agatha Christie. JMHO

I just realized we might be chatting right past each other. It's not intentional. all the respect.



Delphi Murders Trial: Day 11 | Prison psychologist says Allen made multiple confessions

I’m not a big fan of Wala. She may have blabbed to a YouTuber. Don’t think it will be the linchpin of the appeal being granted. Just another leak.
Nor will the 12 minutes in question be a linchpin.
That said, I’m braced for a second trial.
After all, it is Delphi.
I’ve learned to expect anything and everything.

jmo

 

[RexLuther]

Can you explain the significance of BG having enough balance, despite wind, to walk with hands in pockets on the bridge?

Abby also had her hands in her pockets.

View attachment 561053
Photo: IndyStar

I was referring to the GH video last year where he is showing dialogue with Cheyenne on how it was extremely windy yet the historical weather has lesser winds along AW and BG traversing the bridge with relative ease.

 

[INfisherman]

I’m not a big fan of Wala. She may have blabbed to a YouTuber. Don’t think it will be the linchpin of the appeal being granted. Just another leak.
Nor will the 12 minutes in question be a linchpin.
That said, I’m braced for a second trial.
After all, it is Delphi.
I’ve learned to expect anything and everything.

jmo

Yes, it is Delphi & most anything can happen. However, JG likely isn’t going to give what’s contained in the defense’s MTCE very much merit. The state will respond to this motion & we’ll see if she feels anything is worth a hearing. If not, then we wait & see what the appellate attorneys have to present in ~37 days.

JMO