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

[INfisherman]

Didn't answer my question. Why was he talking about it, this was the prosecution's bombshell during trial.

Because that’s what content creators do, they speculate, just like he was doing from the snippet I heard. "Maybe…". "What if….".

Why did Auger say RA left & never went back to the CS when interviewed by the Mottas & discussing the headphone jack nonsense after the sentencing? Oh, around the 1:05:30 marker, about 1:01:00 for full context.

MOO

 

[susane7]

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

Me neither. People didn't post the entire video but he was telling that he heard that in one of RA confessions he mentioned a van. He was talking about the van months later after RA confessions..

 

[FrostedGlass]

It's a small town.

IMO
I totally agree with you. Its population in 2017 was around 2900 people and I'm pretty sure many of those know that van and its driver. It's quite a distinctive vehicle.

It's ludicrous for me to believe that "information that the killer knows" is that BW drove a white van and came home at a certain time.

 

[mrjitty]

Me neither. People didn't post the entire video but he was telling that he heard that in one of RA confessions he mentioned a van. He was talking about the van months later after RA confessions..

So basically someone leaked it? Including possibly the defence?

But how does this help?

IMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Video has not been deleted.

Could you please link the full video?

 

[sunshineray]

IMO
I totally agree with you. Its population in 2017 was around 2900 people and I'm pretty sure many of those know that van and its driver. It's quite a distinctive vehicle.

It's ludicrous for me to believe that "information that the killer knows" is that BW drove a white van and came home at a certain time.

I doubt RA "knew" Weber, except maybe his face from some local place over the years. But RA did, on his own admission, see a van on Weber's driveway on February 13, 2017, at the time Weber said he returned home in a van and it changed the course of RA's plans. MO

 

[INfisherman]

IMO
I totally agree with you. Its population in 2017 was around 2900 people and I'm pretty sure many of those know that van and its driver. It's quite a distinctive vehicle.

It's ludicrous for me to believe that "information that the killer knows" is that BW drove a white van and came home at a certain time.

I wonder why the defense focused so much on questioning where BW was & trying to imply he was out fixing ATMs, trying to impeach him & then have that video from discovery all along?

Maybe it would have been easier to use the small town approach?

But still odd that they had the video yet tried to make it seem BW got home so much later in the day & even want the FBI agent to testify remotely. Must have been something there for them to do all that, then slap a subpoena down dramatically when BW didn’t play along.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

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.

More spaghetti at the wall and they missed Prince Spaghetti Day. MO

 

[Megnut]

I'm going to guess that nowhere in the US can you retain a defense attorney (where murder charges are on the line) for 5K.

I think everyone knows (all the relevant parties know) that attorney was never RA's defense attorney of note/record, but was paid to advise RA up to the point at which he was charged. The attorney knows it, KA knows it, RA knows it, the lawyers on both sides know it.

How do I "know" that? Well, in addition to RA himself saying that he would hire his own attorney (with no mention of the one KA hired), RA didn't tell the judge, at his arraignment, that his attorney wasn't there. Clearly RA had no expectation that he would be there, representing him. I'll bet money the attorney made that clear to RA too.

I notice there's no affidavit from the attorney, no affidavit from RA, just one from KA affirming she did retain the attorney, for a fraction of what a private defense retainer (in a murder case) would be. We don't even know if the attorney reversed those charges, realizing he would be of little use to RA, either not positioned to defend murder charges or above RA's pay grade. Either way, it's the price of a consultation, after hours no less.

Desperate Hail Mary by the Defense. IMO it changes nothing.

RA did not have an attorney of record. Guessing he either wauved his right to counsel for the arraignment or the Court quickly appointed him one for the arraignment alone. We know he represented he'd secure his own which he did not do, ultimately asking the Court to appoint him counsel. Meanwhile, decisions were made to protect RA from harming others, himself and from other detainees. He needed more than the local jail could provide.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

More spaghetti at the wall and they missed Prince Spaghetti Day. MO

They missed the wall, too.

MOO

 

[sunshineray]

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:



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.

Has anyone asked Gibson why he didn't show after recieving 5k the night before to show?

 

[INfisherman]

I'm going to guess that nowhere in the US can you retain a defense attorney (where murder charges are on the line) for 5K.

I think everyone knows (all the relevant parties know) that attorney was never RA's defense attorney of note/record, but was paid to advise RA up to the point at which he was charged. The attorney knows it, KA knows it, RA knows it, the lawyers on both sides know it.

How do I "know" that? Well, in addition to RA himself saying that he would hire his own attorney (with no mention of the one KA hired), RA didn't tell the judge, at his arraignment, that his attorney wasn't there. Clearly RA had no expectation that he would be there, representing him. I'll bet money the attorney made that clear to RA too.

I notice there's no affidavit from the attorney, no affidavit from RA, just one from KA affirming she did retain the attorney, for a fraction of what a private defense retainer (in a murder case) would be. We don't even know if the attorney reversed those charges, realizing he would be of little use to RA, either not positioned to defend murder charges or above RA's pay grade. Either way, it's the price of a consultation, after hours no less.

Desperate Hail Mary by the Defense. IMO it changes nothing.

RA did not have an attorney of record. Guessing he either wauved his right to counsel for the arraignment or the Court quickly appointed him one for the arraignment alone. We know he represented he'd secure his own which he did not do, ultimately asking the Court to appoint him counsel. Meanwhile, decisions were made to protect RA from harming others, himself and from other detainees. He needed more than the local jail could provide.

JMO

Nail on the head & yes, some of it is blatantly obvious. Much more so considering the defense themselves said that they expected their yet to be written MTCE would likely be denied during one of their many interviews, IIRC.

Additionally, the whole MTCE filing causes a delay in the appeal process, so the other 2 attorneys can get their ducks in a row. Common legal strategy.

Also, the 3 clowns can go around & crowdsource for more SODDI evidence from the SM crowds & provide that to the appellate attorneys.

MOO

 

[snarast]

They may not have leaked the photos intentionally, but the defense team did in fact leave those extremely sensitive photos unsecured in an office. Where they were seen, copied and distributed by an outsider to the public via Internet.

Abby and Libby nude or partially nude and sliced open.

The defense team’s negligence and unprofessionalism led DIRECTLY to anyone who cared to see those pictures online, and also led to the suicide of the person involved.

Obviously the casual perusal of their daughter/grandaughter dead and unclothed, by anyone who chose to see it online, intensified the already unendurable grief for the families.

I agree with @Jade using the term “repugnant.

I too see this as repugnant. To the thousandth power.

JMO

Repugnant indeed. Utterly Indefensible also comes to mind.

 

[FrostedGlass]

I wonder why the defense focused so much on questioning where BW was & trying to imply he was out fixing ATMs, trying to impeach him & then have that video from discovery all along?

Maybe it would have been easier to use the small town approach?

But still odd that they had the video yet tried to make it seem BW got home so much later in the day & even want the FBI agent to testify remotely. Must have been something there for them to do all that, then slap a subpoena down dramatically when BW didn’t play along.

JMO

I don't know why the D did some things; BR admitted during one of his interviews that they made mistakes. It's likely that some important bits of discovery weren't found in time.
Look at how long it took KS to find the RA tip.

IMO, they didn't pull that "fixing ATMs" out of the air so it must have come up in an earlier interview. Is that what he told the FBI and that's why Nick objected and Gull denied the request for a remote hearing?

I speculate they brought that subpoena to court because they had problems serving him in the past.

 

[INfisherman]

I don't know why the D did some things; BR admitted during one of his interviews that they made mistakes. It's likely that some important bits of discovery weren't found in time.
Look at how long it took KS to find the RA tip.

IMO, they didn't pull that "fixing ATMs" out of the air so it must have come up in an earlier interview. Is that what he told the FBI and that's why Nick objected and Gull denied the request for a remote hearing?

I speculate they brought that subpoena to court because they had problems serving him in the past.

I covered the remote testimony for TTF14 earlier week when he mentioned it. It’s upthread. (ETA - see link below)

NM’s objection was how Baldwin tried to impeach BW. JG said he needed to do it properly, something to the effect of use what you have available (statement, evidence) before getting another tool for the job, so to speak. It was covered clearly in the MSM article I linked. That’s why she denied the remote hearing.

That being said, we both know each side is going to try to take away as much firepower as possible from one another so NM’s objection could have been dual purpose.

Honestly, I don’t know what BW told the agent, as that was prior to me digging into this case. Yeah, AB might have thought he had something but if the video is to be believed, it doesn’t seem to add up to much. 15 min tops doesn’t turn the timeline upside down for me, if the timestamp difference is accurately stated.

Might just be attempts at muddying things up - who knows.

MOO

ETA added link discussed above.

Post in thread 'Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #218'
GUILTY - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #218

 

[Arkay]

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.

IMO this theory falls apart because it is the Bridge Guy in Libby’s video who tells them to go down the hill. We know that Bridge Guy is Richard Allen, as proved in court.

If Libby had the wherewithal to tape the man who told them to go down the hill, why didn’t she tape this “someone else” at 2:13? She still had possession of her phone. Who’s this someone else?

There’s only Richard Allen spotted on the bridge. On video, by his own admission, and by witness testimony.

As far as I’m concerned, this case is done and dusted.

JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

I covered the remote testimony for TTF14 earlier week when he mentioned it. It’s upthread. (ETA - see link below)

NM’s objection was how Baldwin tried to impeach BW. JG said he needed to do it properly, something to the effect of use what you have available (statement, evidence) before getting another tool for the job, so to speak. It was covered clearly in the MSM article I linked. That’s why she denied the remote hearing.

That being said, we both know each side is going to try to take away as much firepower as possible from one another so NM’s objection could have been dual purpose.

Honestly, I don’t know what BW told the agent, as that was prior to me digging into this case. Yeah, AB might have thought he had something but if the video is to be believed, it doesn’t seem to add up to much. 15 min tops doesn’t turn the timeline upside down for me, if the timestamp difference is accurately stated.

Might just be attempts at muddying things up - who knows.

MOO

ETA added link discussed above.

Post in thread 'Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #218'
GUILTY - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #218

I went back and read your post. Thanks for the link.
MOO and IANAL
Here's my problem understanding what went on between Nick and the judge. It would not have been a improper impeachment if the judge would have allowed testimony from the FBI. The subpoena seems to have been issued within a reasonable time frame. It seemed to me all was well until the FBI who did testify remembered nothing, causing the D to ask for video testimony from FBI Pohl, which the judge denied.

I'm curious about IN law regarding circumstances where a witness can't appear in person but can be available to appear on video.

 

[Megnut]

Speculation.

In an early statement, BW could have recalled incorrectly that he spent time checking ATMs (which iiuc doesn't necessarily mean being at them physically), prior to coming home and checking on his parents' house.

Then later, after seeing the video evidence and time stamps, sleuthed his own work history -- no doubt, those ATMs would have a record of his servicing -- and recalculated.

RA is a lying liar who lies who uses bits of truth. Perhaps he heard BW's van long minutes before he might have seen it. It's RA that supplies the explanation for otherwise disparate pieces of evidence. Why the change of elevation, why the creek crossing, why the undressing and confusing redressing. It's not JUST knowing about BW and his van, it's how it informed what RA did next.

I don't know what road that video came from (looks like the HH road to me) but didn't BW live in one house and check on another? Which absolutely could put him at one house at about 2:30 and another at about 2:45. Can we even be sure the footage in question is even BW's or even from that day? Maybe it was off by 12 hours in tge opposite direction. I don't accept anything as fact when it comes from the Defense.

If only we ask, why did RA march the girls to a second, more obscure, location? Something must have spooked him. Why did he let/force one girl to redress, if only to kill her anyway? Panic.

So what spooked him if not BW and his van.?

It fits.

JMO

 

[RexLuther]

Could you please link the full video?

Hello,
The GH video can be found here

Head to 2 hrs 13 mins for his 'rumour' about the confession / white van. He was in contact in Wala. JMO.

 

[sunshineray]

Please list evidence that the defense team leaked any photos.

SM doesn't count.

I'm wondering was AB "snookered and abused" by his "friend" MW or helped by a trusted analyst and strategist as he was later described?

AB's attorney basically argued (paraphrasing), what was the big deal anyway? The photos were going to be revealed that coming January at trial. He, with clear thought, totally disregarded that the photos were leaked online, not shown in trial and sealed thereafter.

They were served up to social media so everyone in potential jury pools could see the tree and stick "runes". They needed as many people as possible, over many SM platforms, talking and analyzing the "Odinist runes"...before the jury selection started.

If AB's attorney can, in a filing to the court, bastardize the truth/reality of the situation, what else being claimed as truth are also lies? What was MW, a betraying friend or strategizing analyst working for his friend on the case? I choose the latter and it disgusts me. AJMO