GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #219

[susane7]

Victim impact statements are heavy stuff and RA was probably medicated. I think Baldwin's response was possibly related to this quote below; he sure didn't want replays of what happened in Westville.
[snip]
"You could've taken accountability," Libby's grandfather, Mike Patty, said to Allen. "You need to stand up and not appeal."

Delphi murders: Convicted killer Richard Allen sentenced to 130 years

Convicted Delphi, Indiana, killer Richard Allen was sentenced on Friday to 130 years in prison for the 2017 murders of two teenage girls.

abcnews.go.com

If the client RA, want to not appeal, want to confess, apologize to the victims, even tought the attorney doesn't want/advise that, the decision final is always from the client . If RA is man enough he could to say to his attorneys "look I know you don't advise me to do that but I want to take this weight off my shoulders and confess" but he isn't and it seems he feels obligated to do everything his attorneys and wife say even if didn't want exactly to do that.

 

[FrostedGlass]

If the client RA, want to not appeal, want to confess, apologize to the victims, even tought the attorney doesn't want/advise that, the decision final is always from the client . If RA is man enough he could to say to his attorneys "look I know you don't advise me to do that but I want to take this weight off my shoulders and confess" but he isn't and it seems he feels obligated to do everything his attorneys and wife say even if didn't want exactly to do that.

Except no one has said any of that happened.
It sounded to me like they were trying to guilt him into waiving his Constitutional right to appeal his sentence.
Baldwin believes RA is innocent. As do a lot of other people.
MOO

 

[susane7]

Baldwin could believe that RA is innocent (I don't believe that he believes that RA is innocent but even if he believes in that), if the client want to apologize, say something, even procliam his innocence, etc the client have that right. The attorney rushing to the client to stop the client say something or afraid what the client would say it's ridiculous and not normal IMO.

 

[Megnut]

I don't think AB thinks RA is innocent at all.

I think AB got stung and can't let it go. I think AB thought he could successfully hamstring the State, wanted to get the SW thrown out (bye, bye cartridge in a keepsake box) and introduce an elaborate SODDI story which would open the door to certain individual SODDIs in order to create some kind of doubt among jurors. Unsuccessful with the judge, I think he took to Frank's motions and youtubers to  inform infect the jury pool with unsupported, fanciful implausibilty.

IMO there is NO WAY the AB used to think it was a sacrificial offering to Odin, was enlightened, then knew it had to be RL and KAK because of RD's incredible wealth of credibility.

Victims moved and brought back.
Airpods plugged in.
Batteries removed.

Altogether unsupported nonsense.

Just like the narrative that secret hearings were held for which RA's counsel was unaware, only to find out that attorney specifically did not represent RA.

AB should consider going back to his fetal position.

Frank is dead.

JMO

 

[somequestions]

Except no one has said any of that happened.
It sounded to me like they were trying to guilt him into waiving his Constitutional right to appeal his sentence.
Baldwin believes RA is innocent. As do a lot of other people.
MOO

After reading more about the case, my opinion is that the prosecution did not prove that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think there is the possibility he could be innocent. Whether he actually is innocent, only Richard Allen knows. The jury did not feel the way I do.

In one example pointing towards guilt, on one of RA's devices there was a search for a Delphi update about this case and then after that he(or someone else using his device) searched for whether they should die now three times (source: Carroll County Comet article "Victims and Heroes" from 11-8-24). It does not prove anything, but it does make you wonder if Richard Allen was feeling some sort of remorse for the murders.

But the hat, the height, and the path Richard Allen took back to his car after the murders are always going to leave me wondering whether the jury got it right. If any one of those things could be proven I would be sure the jury got it right.

 

[FrostedGlass]

I don't think AB thinks RA is innocent at all.

I think AB got stung and can't let it go. I think AB thought he could successfully hamstring the State, wanted to get the SW thrown out (bye, bye cartridge in a keepsake box) and introduce an elaborate SODDI story which would open the door to certain individual SODDIs in order to create some kind of doubt among jurors. Unsuccessful with the judge, I think he took to Frank's motions and youtubers to  inform infect the jury pool with unsupported, fanciful implausibilty.

IMO there is NO WAY the AB used to think it was a sacrificial offering to Odin, was enlightened, then knew it had to be RL and KAK because of RD's incredible wealth of credibility.

Victims moved and brought back.
Airpods plugged in.
Batteries removed.

Altogether unsupported nonsense.

Just like the narrative that secret hearings were held for which RA's counsel was unaware, only to find out that attorney specifically did not represent RA.

AB should consider going back to his fetal position.

Frank is dead.

JMO

I remember Lebrato thought RA was innocent, too; and their (L&S) theory ran similar to B&R's.

Baldwin is doing exactly what he's supposed to do post trial. I posted the rules for post-conviction filings a few days ago. He has done a good job of getting all of this stuff on record. IMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

After reading more about the case, my opinion is that the prosecution did not prove that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think there is the possibility he could be innocent. Whether he actually is innocent, only Richard Allen knows. The jury did not feel the way I do.

In one example pointing towards guilt, on one of RA's devices there was a search for a Delphi update about this case and then after that he(or someone else using his device) searched for whether they should die now three times (source: Carroll County Comet article "Victims and Heroes" from 11-8-24). It does not prove anything, but it does make you wonder if Richard Allen was feeling some sort of remorse for the murders.

But the hat, the height, and the path Richard Allen took back to his car after the murders are always going to leave me wondering whether the jury got it right. If any one of those things could be proven I would be sure the jury got it right.

IMO the jury didn't have much of a choice. Nick and the judge made sure that if someone would ask: "Well, if it wasn't him, who else could it be?" there was no one else to point the finger at.

Each new thing I learn about this case makes it more complex and problematic for me and I really, really hate that.

 

[Boxer]

IMO the jury didn't have much of a choice. Nick and the judge made sure that if someone would ask: "Well, if it wasn't him, who else could it be?" there was no one else to point the finger at.

Each new thing I learn about this case makes it more complex and problematic for me and I really, really hate that.

I have no doubts. The timeline.
He saw the group of girls as he got on the trail, they saw him - their time is fixed by one girl's photo of the last bench on the trail which they hsd just passed before RA passed them, the second witness saw then also as they left the trail over the bridge going back to Delphi.
He walked to MHB, stood on platform 1, was seen by the trail loop walkng witness as the A&L approached the bridge.
Where she passed A&L was at the point where one can see the bridge - midway from Mears trail parking.
He said he did not see A&L which not possible.
His own time line would have him see them even if something else also happened.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I remember Lebrato thought RA was innocent, too; and their (L&S) theory ran similar to B&R's.

Baldwin is doing exactly what he's supposed to do post trial. I posted the rules for post-conviction filings a few days ago. He has done a good job of getting all of this stuff on record. IMO

Lebrato had a very limited amount of time with the case. He chose to latch on to B & R’s pagan fantasy. I doubt very seriously he thought that same thing after the trial.
I disagree that Baldwin has done a good job. The things he has “gotten on the record” are a continuation of the farfetched drivel he spewed before the trial. It will not matter at all once appeals actually begin. He just won’t shut the h_ll up. Good lawyers know when to shut up and let the appellate court take over.

My opinion

 

[FrostedGlass]

I have no doubts. The timeline.
He saw the group of girls as he got on the trail, they saw him - their time is fixed by one girl's photo of the last bench on the trail which they hsd just passed before RA passed them, the second witness saw then also as they left the trail over the bridge going back to Delphi.
He walked to MHB, stood on platform 1, was seen by the trail loop walkng witness as the A&L approached the bridge.
Where she passed A&L was at the point where one can see the bridge - midway from Mears trail parking.
He said he did not see A&L which not possible.
His own time line would have him see them even if something else also happened.

We've been on this for a long time and I'm glad that you have no doubts. For me, it's like I'm caught up in the fine print of this case. So many of the details don't work and I can't seem to hand-wave them away.

 

[mrjitty]

would Lobrato say oh yeah my former client is guilty? Pre trial???

i have no idea why anyone places weight on these statements by defence lawyers.

 

[FrostedGlass]

would Lobrato say oh yeah my former client is guilty? Pre trial???

i have no idea why anyone places weight on these statements by defence lawyers.

No. He specifically said he thought RA was innocent and Barb Mc asked him: don't all attys say that?
Sometimes they really do think their clients are innocent and sometimes they are.
Indiana has 50 wrongfully convicted/exonerated folks.

 

[Boxer]

We've been on this for a long time and I'm glad that you have no doubts. For me, it's like I'm caught up in the fine print of this case. So many of the details don't work and I can't seem to hand-wave them away.

I am interested in what is bothering you.
For me the timeline and the lie about not seeing A&L is the evidence that cannot be squirreled out of.

 

[INfisherman]

I have no doubts. The timeline.
He saw the group of girls as he got on the trail, they saw him - their time is fixed by one girl's photo of the last bench on the trail which they hsd just passed before RA passed them, the second witness saw then also as they left the trail over the bridge going back to Delphi.
He walked to MHB, stood on platform 1, was seen by the trail loop walkng witness as the A&L approached the bridge.
Where she passed A&L was at the point where one can see the bridge - midway from Mears trail parking.
He said he did not see A&L which not possible.
His own time line would have him see them even if something else also happened.

That & why didn’t he report seeing any other men that day?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Except no one has said any of that happened.
It sounded to me like they were trying to guilt him into waiving his Constitutional right to appeal his sentence.
Baldwin believes RA is innocent. As do a lot of other people.
MOO

Baldwin 'says' he believes RA is innocent. SOP for a defense attorney and coming from Baldwin, I don't put any faith in what he says period.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

No. He specifically said he thought RA was innocent and Barb Mc asked him: don't all attys say that?
Sometimes they really do think their clients are innocent and sometimes they are.
Indiana has 50 wrongfully convicted/exonerated folks.

Ok but we've seen all the evidence he has seen now.

There is nothing that suggests RA is innocent IMO.

At best you can argue there is some doubt. And i am fully onboard with everyone getting their constitutional protections. It's the Rick innocence project i really struggle with.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Ok but we've seen all the evidence he has seen now.

There is nothing that suggests RA is innocent IMO.

At best you can argue there is some doubt. And i am fully onboard with everyone getting their constitutional protections. It's the Rick innocence project i really struggle with.

There is a lot of evidence that I haven't seen.

Many went into this case holding the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty. IMO the prosecution's case was not strong enough for me to reach "guilty."

 

[sunshineray]

There is a lot of evidence that I haven't seen.

Many went into this case holding the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty. IMO the prosecution's case was not strong enough for me to reach "guilty."

With RA's excessive amount of freely-given and cognitive confessions with corroborated details...his guilt was proven beyond a "reasonable" doubt. IMO the jurors came to a logical and well thought out verdict. There was no rush to judgement. They did their duty and I'm sure have clear inner feelings of a hard job well done. Likewise, the prosecutors should also feel that satisfaction that justice was done for the victims, Abigail and Liberty, their families and friends. The evidence they presented was overwhelming and it convicted. RA convicted himself of double child murder, BARD, his guilty conscience did that, his coming to God moments did that. I still don't understand why we shouldn't believe him?
AJMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

There is a lot of evidence that I haven't seen.

Many went into this case holding the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty. IMO the prosecution's case was not strong enough for me to reach "guilty."

In a Court of Law a Defendant is Innocent until Proven Guilty. A group of 15+ people were selected through the voir dire process, sat through weeks of trial, and heard and saw all of the evidence presented. They unanimously agreed and found him GUILTY.

It really doesn't matter what we, the average true crime sleuths, think nor should it. Notice I included myself in that equation as well. I felt the State's case was strong enough even before the trial started. IMO the Defense was farcical at best and outright compromised and incompetent at worst.

Thank goodness RA's guilt or innocence wasn't left up to us, but to a far more well informed group of randomly selected peers in a Judicial Courtroom setting and not a website.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

There is a lot of evidence that I haven't seen.

Many went into this case holding the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty. IMO the prosecution's case was not strong enough for me to reach "guilty."

So what in your mind exonerated him? Reasonable doubt is not unquestionable doubt IMO.

So what makes him not the murderer in your mind? 47+ people wrongly convicted has nothing to do with this case, as that is what you bring in your mind, not the prosecution.