GUILTY Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #220

[INfisherman]

It's hard to believe she did not at least suspect him. She either had her blinders on or believed his lie.

BBM

Likely both.

MOO

 

[INfisherman]

IIRC they did recover a cigarette butt down by the creek's edge. Maybe water had washed away the DNA or it wasn't enough for a full profile?

You know that sicko psycho would have to smoke while he watched Abby and Libby laying there bleeding out.

This just reinforces the fact that his family 'knew', yet they chose to remain silent to protect this sad, little, evil gnome of a man. 2+2=4 Every time, all day long.

EBM - Remove Non POI names

JMO

Don’t forget the beer with that cigarette.

 

[girlhasnoname]

It's hard to believe she did not at least suspect him. She either had her blinders on or believed his lie.

You stated that much more kindly than I could have.

 

[Boxer]

It's hard to believe she did not at least suspect him. She either had her blinders on or believed his lie.

Yes, so hard perhaps it is not true.

 

[TristanP]

A kind FYI, a partial source was posted not a week ago on the previous page but I’ll be happy to clear things up just for you.

3 of the 4 eyewitnesses called by the prosecution who saw BG are listed in the last MSM article I posted upthread on just the previous page. They are RV, BW & Betsy Blair.

1. The state showed a photo of the "Bridge Guy" and Voorhies said, "That was the man I had waved at on the trail."
2. Wilber testified that she believed the man she saw walking on the bridge was the man seen in the photo shared by investigators.
3. Blair also said the man she saw on the bridge is the man in the photo released by police of "Bridge Guy."

Delphi Murders Trial: Day 4 | Focus on examination of physical evidence recovered at crime scene

Testimony and cross-examination of the state's witness, ISP crime scene investigator Brian Olehy, continued on day four of the Delphi Murders trial.

www.wrtv.com

The 4th is Sarah Carbaugh. Here is a snippet from the trial transcripts which were released about a month ago. They can be a valuable source, if you require them. I’ve posted them before & evidently you haven’t read them either. Here is a snippet of SC’s testimony from Volume 12, page 193, line 11, under direct examination by Chief Deputy Prosecutor Stacey Diener (she’s the Q & SC is the A, for precise clarity):

Q And so I’m going to show you what’s been marked as State’s Exhibit 210; do you recognize this picture?
A Yes.
Q And did you see it on the news?
A Yes.
Q And when you saw it on the news, did you recognize the image?
A Yes.
Q And what did you recognize it as?
A I recognized it as the man I saw earlier covered in mud and blood on the road.
Q And the one that you just marked, at least the area –
A Yeah, of the area of where it was.
Q Okay. And so you became familiar that this person was referred to as Bridge Guy?
A Um-hmm, yes.

View attachment 607987

ETA Emboldening for emphasis. All 4 BG eyewitnesses identified the man they saw as BG who is by default Richard Allen unless his conviction is overturned, which IMO likely isn’t happening since his appellate attorneys are requesting an extension to file their motion. I arrive at that opinion because if there were any low hanging fruit (easy pickings for it to be reversed) they’d be in front of the judge already.

I hope this helps. See you in a couple of weeks or so.

Yeah, that's my issue. These witnesses said the person in the images is the same person they saw - not that the person in the images is Richard Allen.

There's not one piece of evidence that proves RA and Bridge Guy are one and the same.

 

[TristanP]

Not the OP but the source was the trial itself.

None of the bridge witnesses knew or identified Rick Allen, but agreed that the person they saw was consistent with the image in the video.

Court transcripts will bear that out IMO, once they're released.

JMO

Identifying the person in the image as the same guy they saw is not at all the same as identifying the person in the image as Richard Allen.

 

[Megnut]

Identifying the person in the image as the same guy they saw is not at all the same as identifying the person in the image as Richard Allen.

That is correct.

RA himself provided the additional details that confirmed he was the man on the bridge.

The witnesses saw bridge guy. RA named him.

It's not complicated.

(Is just exceedingly unfortunate that his tip was lost. A lucky dodge by him, meeting as he did. The case grew legs at a time when true crime and dark conspiracies were becoming industries, but when you clear out the noise, this one isn't hard. It's just awful. Minus five years, LE might have been able to recover the coat, blood evidence and the girls' items before he had the abundant time to get rid of them. However, in addition to corroborating witness testimony, LE had Libby's video -- which, together, the two terrified girls managed to keep hidden. It captured the moment they were overtaken by their abductor. Evidence gold, particularly at a time and location where their were no fixed CCTVs. Her video captured one man, dressed in jeans and a Carhartt, timestamped at 2:13. Endless redundancy, Rick Allen was also a witness. He identified a man on the bridge, as far as the first platform, dressed in jeans and a Carhartt, consistent with what all the other witnesses -- including the two girls, as recorded on video -- described. And thereby shifted himself from a witness to the subject. He named the man everyone described.)

JMO

 

[Boxer]

Yeah, that's my issue. These witnesses said the person in the images is the same person they saw - not that the person in the images is Richard Allen.

There's not one piece of evidence that proves RA and Bridge Guy are one and the same.

Timing.

 

[susane7]

That is correct.

RA himself provided the additional details that confirmed he was the man on the bridge.

The witnesses saw bridge guy. RA named him.

It's not complicated.

Exactly. Richard Allen confirmed he saw those witnesses in the same area and at the same time the witnesses saw the Bridge Guy. He described them and even said the girls look like sisters (they were sisters or half-sisters, I think). He never saw any other man.

After that, some 15-20 minutes later, one other witness saw the guy on the video, Bridge guy, on the first platform of the monon high bridge. Richard Allen said he was at the first platform of the bridge "watching fish".


The timeline is absolutely damning for him and there is only logical explanation: Richard Allen = BG.

Ah and the witnesses passed him for what? 5-10 seconds and they had no ideia they would had to describe him later and Richard Allen was disguised.

 

[INfisherman]

Yeah, that's my issue. These witnesses said the person in the images is the same person they saw - not that the person in the images is Richard Allen.

There's not one piece of evidence that proves RA and Bridge Guy are one and the same.

No, there’s a few different circumstantial pieces which did prove it was RA to 12 jurors & many who followed the case. Already been stated above. RA’s own words & the timeline put him there & no other witnesses saw a man dressed like that during those key moments.

RA put himself there when he spoke to DD. He saw the group of girls at FB & they saw him. There was social media evidence from those girls which started the timing. BB saw him & no one else on the trails except for the victims, of course. RA saw no other men dressed like he told LE he was in 2022. He lied when he tried changing his time on the trails in 2022.

You don’t have to be convinced - only the 12 jurors.

Also, I guess you’ll be providing sources that back up your claim of no evidence proving it was Richard Allen?

ETA BB seeing victims

 

[Justice101]

No, there’s a few different circumstantial pieces which did prove it was RA to 12 jurors & many who followed the case. Already been stated above. RA’s own words & the timeline put him there & no other witnesses saw a man dressed like that during those key moments.

RA put himself there when he spoke to DD. He saw the group of girls at FB & they saw him. There was social media evidence from those girls which started the timing. BB saw him & no one else on the trails except for the victims, of course. RA saw no other men dressed like he told LE he was in 2022. He lied when he tried changing his time on the trails in 2022.

You don’t have to be convinced - only the 12 jurors.

Also, I guess you’ll be providing sources that back up your claim of no evidence proving it was Richard Allen?

ETA BB seeing victims

Didn't RA also in one of his admission say that he was disturbed by a vehicle (white van) on that gravel road leading in and under the bridge?

Only the killed would know that.

IMO, some people would not be good jurors because they don't understand their role is not 100.000% total proof... of course, beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury is the law. It goes both way though, there are people who would not be good jurors because they would convict just based on the police arresting a suspect.

Somehow, in all of its shortcomings, it still is a great system for getting to the truth and having justice.

 

[INfisherman]

Didn't RA also in one of his admission say that he was disturbed by a vehicle (white van) on that gravel road leading in and under the bridge?

Only the killed would know that.

IMO, some people would not be good jurors because they don't understand their role is not 100.000% total proof... of course, beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury is the law. It goes both way though, there are people who would not be good jurors because they would convict just based on the police arresting a suspect.

Somehow, in all of its shortcomings, it still is a great system for getting to the truth and having justice.

RBBM

This is where things get blurry for many. I think there are people who want more than the standard to convict in many instances. I feel that is a bit much. It’s not interpreted as beyond any doubt whatsoever.

You’re correct that many people wouldn’t make good jurors & part of the reason for that is the recent trend to have defense supporters out there tainting potential jury pools via SM & YT, spinning their side of things. That should be addressed via gag orders.

JMO

 

[Trebor5591]

There's not one piece of evidence that proves RA and Bridge Guy are one and the same.

Not so. There is the evidence of his 60 confessions. There is the evidence of his missing phone. There's the evidence of his placing himself on the bridge at the time of the abduction. There is the evidence of his bullet found between the girls. There's the evidence of the timing of the white van. There is plenty enough evidence. Oh and the reason why none of the witnesses identified him as Bridge Guy? Wasn't Bridge Guy in disguise, covering 75% of his face and head? Richard Allen is guilty--the jury got it right. JMO.

 

[snarast]

Honestly, RA seems so unsympathetic it’s easy to see him as the only solution.

That said, I’d have to analyse the cell phone data with regards to other suspects - most notably KAK - in order to be 100% convinced.

 

[Megnut]

There's no evidence of any other men at the bridge at 2:14.

There's no evidence the girls went anywhere after 2:32.

Actively using the phone until 2:14. Phone stops moving at 2:32, located under AW.

Except for being racked, a gun was not fired, at least not as the murder weapon.

Richard Allen provided information only the assailant would know when he doubled down forcefully that there was "no way" a bullet from his gun... brain leak. Leaking consciousness of guilt/ awareness of the crime/crime scene. They weren't shot.

That's why he remained so confident. He knew too much and thst quietly betrayed him.

The timeline created a tight triangle which put the man the juveniles saw, the man BB saw, the man LG recorded, all of whom matched the man in that video within minutes of 2 pm, near and on the bridge, dressed like Richard Allen, in the positions he confirmed (path, bridge, platform). Impossible for him not to have encountered the girls...

The question mark about the first platform but no man in LG's 2:07 photo -- Richard Allen answered for that. He said he followed them.

Which means he let them pass by and then turned around and followed them. A confession corroborated by LG's photo, then video. How would someone guess at that and get it right? They wouldn't know LG took that photo, with no man on the bridge. His explanation fits. Like a glove that fits. He was on the bridge (when BB saw him right around 2pm), he left the bridge (because he wasn't on it at 2:07), then returned to the bridge, where he was filmed at 2:13.

I can't underscore this enough, his confessions connect the known facts, including confirming that he (Richard Allen) didn't leave at 1:30 or 2:15 because he witnessed BW's return somewhere around/after 2:30.

And again, Richard Allen confessed to watching the girls "to make sure they didn't suffer". Why huh? They suffered terror, trauma and fatal injuries. Pretty much the definition of suffering. But, outside of MEs and other medical folks, who could possibly know that each girl's injuries, while ultimately fatal, weren't immediately fatal? And here we have a witness who describes watching, to make sure. And embedded in that confession -- he used words to make himself SOUND caring (didn't want them suffer), the reality is that he CAUSED them to suffer, then WATCHED them, to make sure they WERE DEAD, all the way dead.

That there was no DNA connecting him to the crime scene is unfortunate but not surprising. He had five years to clean his car and get rid of evidence. He took a sock and panties. I shudder to imagine what DNA they contained. Both girls were forced to cross the creek. No way to know what DNA evidence may have been washed away.

Richard Allen finds in the blanks.

And is right where he belongs. Two life sentences and direct passage to hell.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

Honestly, RA seems so unsympathetic it’s easy to see him as the only solution.

That said, I’d have to analyse the cell phone data with regards to other suspects - most notably KAK - in order to be 100% convinced.

No one in LE could place KAK in Delphi the day of the murders. They looked at him hard when the FBI raided his home for CSAM images & searched the Wabash River & nearby relative’s property before RA was a thought. While this doesn’t exclude him or his father from somehow possibly being indirectly involved, (think pointing RA to one of the girls) I’m confident neither were actual participants in Delphi that dreadful day, at least that any evidence that’s been made public shows. If there was, KAK took care of it when he wiped the last iPhone he "lost" or "forgot" to give LE during those raids.

The one responsible for the killings is in prison in OK today. Other actors? Possibly but nothing that leans towards that so far.

JMO

 

[snarast]

No one in LE could place KAK in Delphi the day of the murders. They looked at him hard when the FBI raided his home for CSAM images & searched the Wabash River & nearby relative’s property king before RA was a thought. While this doesn’t exclude him or his father from somehow possibly being indirectly involved, (think pointing RA to one of the girls) I’m confident neither were actual participants in Delphi that dreadful day, at least that any evidence that’s been made public shows. If there was, KAK took care of it when he wiped the last iPhone he "lost" or "forgot" to give LE during those raids.

The one responsible for the killings is in prison in OK today. Other actors? Possibly but nothing that leans towards that so far.

JMO

I still would have to scrutinise the data. I could spend a year on that probably.

The coincidences seem so bizarre. KAK chatting with Libby in the hours before…it’s not that I think it has to be KAK himself, but someone connected to him. That could be RA.

 

[Boxer]

Honestly, RA seems so unsympathetic it’s easy to see him as the only solution.

That said, I’d have to analyse the cell phone data with regards to other suspects - most notably KAK - in order to be 100% convinced.

KAK successfully hid his phone during the search warrant, wiped it and then turned it in saying and found it on the microwave.

KAK seemed likely, but its also true the area has a lot of sex predators so a young teen girl not being careful on line and falling for a catfish at the same time as running into an in person creep on a trail who had a fetish about and decided to act out the murder and raping of teenagers is entirely possible.

 

[snarast]

KAK successfully hid his phone during the search warrant, wiped it and then turned it in saying and found it on the microwave.

KAK seemed likely, but its also true the area has a lot of sex predators so a young teen girl not being careful on line and falling for a catfish at the same time as running into a in person creep on a trail who had a fetish about and decided to act out the murder and raping of teenagers is entirely possible.

That is some advertisement. But, yes, you are probably right.

Lightning can strike twice at the same coordinates.

I have to admit KAK’s constant and effortless lies don’t help. And, something tells me RA needs ”help” to do what he did. ”Inspiration”. ”Direction”. Or helpful surreptitious suggestions from someone or other.

Occam’s razor seems to favour the non-conspiracy option, so we can go with that. RA alone.

 

[INfisherman]

That is some advertisement. But, yes, you are probably right.

Lightning can strike twice at the same coordinates.

I have to admit KAK’s constant and effortless lies don’t help. And, something tells me RA needs ”help” to do what he did. ”Inspiration”. ”Direction”. Or helpful surreptitious suggestions from someone or other.

Occam’s razor seems to favour the non-conspiracy option, so we can go with that. RA alone.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he or his dad (closer in age to RA) may have had some hand in pointing out something to RA in regards to one of the girls, but as of right now, there is no evidence of that. Holeman alluded to it during some of the post-trial interviews.

What those 2 phones (KK’s & RA’s) might have revealed is thought provoking had they been seized, unmolested, by LE.

Sure, I’d like for there to be a ring of people involved & charged but it’s not worth tipping their hand without the appropriate evidence to support the charges nor is it right to do so IMO.

JMO