Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - #154 *Richard Allen Arrested*

[steeltowngirl]

Yes well other inmates don't take to kindly to alleged child killers. He's going to realise that goes in every prison.

Prison guards may not be very nice to him either. Even the cafeteria ladies may short him a biscuit. He will not be popular.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I thought the sheriff requested it. Documents at link.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0yBsbxKGgWeNjHorHwenm86rdh9VKQAL8sgpt21kKoHKuSYCNCAudJvKUJYHKQeEwl&id=100044311365463

Good sleuthing! First article I shared could be poor reporting - or - Leazenby filed the request on behalf of the ask by RA. I assume RA can’t file documents for the judge directly on his own.

 

[chocolatechance]

Here's the change of venue rule, but keep in mind that I don't think the venue has actually been changed yet--just the judge has. I need to read the actual order, but generally the defense attorney would request the change of venue.

Rule 76. Change of venue (A) In civil actions where the venue may be changed from the county, such change of venue from the county may be had only upon the filing of a verified motion specifically stating the grounds therefor by the party requesting the change. The motion shall be granted only upon a showing that the county where suit is pending is a party or that the party seeking the change will be unlikely to receive a fair trial on account of local prejudice or bias regarding a party or the claim or defense presented by a party. A party shall be entitled to only one change of venue from the county. Denial of a motion for change of venue from the county shall be reviewable only for an abuse of discretion. The Rules of Criminal Procedure shall govern proceedings to enforce a statute defining an infraction. (B) In civil actions, where a change may be taken from the judge, such change shall be granted upon the filing of an unverified application or motion without specifically stating the ground therefor by a party or his attorney. Provided, however, a party shall be entitled to only one [1] change from the judge. After a final decree is entered in a dissolution of marriage case or paternity case, a party may take only one change of judge in connection with petitions to modify that decree, regardless of the number of times new petitions are filed. The Rules of Criminal Procedure shall govern proceedings to enforce a statute defining an infraction. (C) In any action except criminal no change of judge or change of venue from the county shall be granted except within the time herein provided. Any such application for change of judge (or change of venue) shall be filed not later than ten [10] days after the issues are first closed on the merits. Except: (1) in those cases where no pleading or answer may be required to be filed by the defending party to close issues (or no responsive pleading is required under a statute), each party shall have thirty [30] days from the date the case is placed and entered on the chronological case summary of the court as having been filed; (2) in those cases of claims in probate and receivership proceedings and remonstrances and similar matters, the parties thereto shall have thirty [30] days from the date the case is placed and entered on the chronological case summary of the court as having been filed; (3) if the trial court or a court on appeal orders a new trial, or if a court on appeal otherwise remands a case such that a further hearing and receipt of evidence are required to reconsider all or some of the issues heard during the earlier trial, the parties thereto shall have ten [10] days from the date the order of the trial court is entered or the order of the court on appeal is certified; (4) in the event a change is granted from the judge or county within the prescribed period, as stated above, a request for a change of judge or county may be made by a party still entitled thereto within ten [10] days after the special judge has qualified or the moving party has knowledge the cause has reached the receiving county or there has been a failure to perfect the change. Provided, however, this subdivision (4) shall operate only to enlarge the time allowed for such request under such circumstances, and it shall not operate to reduce the period prescribed in subdivisions (C), (C)(1), (C)(2), (C)(3); (5) where a party has appeared at or received advance notice of a hearing prior to the expiration of the date within which a party may ask for a change of judge or county, and also where at said hearing a trial date is set which setting is promptly entered on the Chronological Case Summary, a party shall be deemed to have waived a request for change of judge or county unless within three days of the oral setting the party files a written objection to the trial setting and a written motion for change of judge or county; (6) if the moving party first obtains knowledge of the grounds for change of venue from the county or judge after the time above limited, he may file said application, which must be verified personally by the party himself, specifically alleging when the cause was first discovered, how discovered, the facts showing the grounds for a change, and why such cause could not have been discovered before by the exercise of due diligence. Any opposing party shall have the right to file counter-affidavits on such issue within ten [10] days, and the ruling of the court may be reviewed only for abuse of discretion. (D) Whenever a change of venue from the county is granted, the parties may, within three (3) days from the granting of the motion or affidavit for the change of venue, agree in open court upon the county to which venue shall be changed, and the court shall transfer such action to such county. In the absence of such agreement, the court shall, within two (2) days thereafter, submit to the parties a written list of all counties adjoining the county from which the venue is changed, and the parties within seven (7) days from the date the clerk mails the list to the parties or within such time, not to exceed fourteen (14) days from that date, as the court shall fix, shall each alternately strike off the names of such counties. The party first filing such motion shall strike first, and the action shall be sent to the county remaining not stricken under such procedure. If a party is brought into the action as provided in Trial Rule 14, and that party thereafter files a motion for change of venue which is granted, that party and the plaintiff shall be the parties entitled to strike. A moving party that fails to strike within said time shall not be entitled to a change of venue, and the court shall resume jurisdiction of the cause. If a nonmoving party fails to strike within the time limit, the clerk shall strike for such party.

FYI—this is the change of venue rule for civil cases—there’s another rule for criminal cases. I can’t quote it right now, but will do so when I’m back on my computer (working from an iPad now, and I CANNOT figure out apple’s editing).

 

[WingsOverTX]

No.

 

[The Observer]

Prison guards may not be very nice to him either. Even the cafeteria ladies may short him a biscuit. He will not be popular.

Uh huh. Also he's been all over the national media. Prisoners are going to know who he is regardless of where he's moved too.

Edited to add: Unless they're moving him to more equipped state facilities for protective custody or confinement.

 

[chocolatechance]

Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure:

Rule 12. Change of venue in criminal cases

(A) Change of Venue from the County. In criminal actions and proceedings to enforce a statute defining an infraction, a motion for change of venue from the county shall be verified or accompanied by an affidavit signed by the criminal defendant or the prosecuting attorney setting forth facts in support of the constitutional or statutory basis or bases for the change. Any opposing party shall have the right to file counter-affidavits within ten (10) days, and after a hearing on the motion, the ruling of the court may be reviewed only for abuse of discretion.

G) Procedure for Change of Venue from County.

(1) Whenever a change of venue from the county is granted, if the parties to such action shall agree in open court, within three (3) days from the granting of the motion or affidavit for the change of venue, upon the county to which the change of venue shall be changed, it shall be the duty of the court to transfer such action to such county. In the absence of such agreement, it shall be the duty of the court within two (2) days thereafter to submit to the parties a written list of all of the counties adjoining the county from which the venue is changed; provided, however, if it appears to the regular judge or the presiding judge before whom an application for a change of venue from the county is pending that the grounds for such change also exist in one or more of the adjoining counties to which the case may be venued, such judge shall have the right to eliminate such county or counties from the list of counties to be submitted for striking and to substitute another county or counties where such grounds, in his opinion, do not exist in order that the defendant shall have a fair and impartial trial.

(2) The parties within seven (7) days thereafter, or within such time, not to exceed fourteen (14) days, as the court shall fix, shall each alternately strike off the names of such counties. The party first filing such motion shall strike first, and the action shall be sent to the county remaining not stricken under such procedure. If a moving party fails to so strike within said time, such party shall not be entitled to a change of venue, and the court shall resume general jurisdiction of the cause. If a non-moving party fails to strike off the names of such counties within the time limited, then the clerk shall strike off such names for such party.

(3) Whenever a court has granted an order for a change of venue to another county and the costs thereof have been paid where an obligation exists to pay such costs for such change, either party to the cause may file a certified copy of the order making such change in the court to which such change has been made, and thereupon such court shall have full jurisdiction of said cause, regardless of the fact that the transcript and papers have not yet been filed with such court to which such change is taken. Nothing in this rule shall be construed as divesting the original court of its jurisdiction to hear and determine emergency matters between the time that a motion for change of venue to another county is filed and the time that the court grants an order for the change of venue.

(4) Notwithstanding any provision of these rules or the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure to the contrary, whenever a court has granted an order for a change of venue to another county, the judge granting the change of venue may be appointed as special judge for that cause in the receiving county if the judge granting the change, the receiving judge, and all of the parties to the cause agree to such appointment.

Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure
————————

Keep in mind that venue has NOT been changed yet; just the judge.

 

[Jillyg]

as far as I am aware, the case has not been moved, it is just a different judge has been assigned. as there is only one judge in Carroll County (?), there had to be a judge assigned from a different county to hear the case

Yes! Ok I was going off angela ganote saying the reason for the change was lack of resources in cc court and that ftwayne facilities were better and able to handle the case.

I wondered if Indiana law allowed that for high profile cases for some reason.

However, I'm not linking her comment because that isn't correct.
The recusal doesn't seem to give that reason for the request.
So things make a lot more sense to me now.

 

[Tealgrove]

Uh huh. Also he's been all over the national media. Prisoners are going to know who he is regardless of where he's moved too.

Edited to add: Unless they're moving him to more equipped state facilities for protective custody or confinement.

I would imagine that he’s in protective custody and also on suicide watch.

They don’t want anything happening to him before they get him to trial.

MOO

 

[Love Never Fails]

Oh I'm not familiar with that case. I'll look it up.

Hi. The case was covered here. He killed his fiancé with a baseball bat, just because he thought he could get away with it. He got 156+ years.

 

[Jillyg]

Uh huh. Also he's been all over the national media. Prisoners are going to know who he is regardless of where he's moved too.

Edited to add: Unless they're moving him to more equipped state facilities for protective custody or confinement.

I'm not sure about indiana but I know other states and federal offices have holding cells within their offices. The Marshals office i worked at the one where we did a transfer to both had holding cells where defendants were processed pending arraignment or pretrial hearing etc.
They were solitary cells and no one shared a cell. Protecting them was a top priority I imagine indiana state police have something similar. Somewhere. Jmo and speculation. I cant imagine he's even close to an actual prison population but again, I don't know how Indy does that.

 

[Jealoushe]

Well said.
On this subject I have been personally bothered by the rights of a murdered victim/ victims.
I personally would not be a participant in the Websleuths community if my friend had not been murdered.
During the murder trial, her family chose to leave the courtroom before a graphic photo of the murder scene was shown.
As her friend, I chose to stay and view the photo in respect and advocacy of my friend as did several other female friends and advocates.
Here is the problem-
my friend’s nude raped dead body was prominently displayed on the BIG SCREEN in the court for everyone in attendance to see.
I know that there were a handful of strangers in the courtroom and I was personally extremely bothered that several male distant acquaintances were able to view the photo.
Here is the dilemma - if you are unfortunate enough to be raped and murdered apparently the whole world (or anyone who is in the courtroom during the trial) gets to see your nude dead body and all your PRIVATE parts become public.
WHY COULD THIS PHOTO NOT HAVE BEEN PASSED PRIVATELY AROUND THE JURY and to the defendant and his attorney ONLY?
In my humble opinion, there was absolutely and unequivocally no reason NO REASON that everyone in the courtroom had access to a nude photo of my friend.
Apparently there is no way to advocate for full privacy and decency for a victim? Or is there?
I remember thinking “wow, if you are unlucky enough to be a victim then you lose ALL PRIVACY -strangers get to see your nude body”

While I am personally vested in Abby and Libby’s case, and curious about what sealed documents contain, if there is anything therein that infringes on the privacy of these innocent young ladies PLEASE KEEP THEM SEALED.

PLEASE PASS PHOTOS IN PRIVATE IF LAWFUL ONLY TO JURY MEMBERS AND DEFENSE AND HIS ATTORNEYS.

No strangers should be allowed to view crime scene photos.

WE ALL NEED TO ADVOCATE FOR THE VICTIMS AND THEIR PRIVACY AND DIGNITY.

Just because you were unfortunate enough to be a victim, this doesn’t give others the right to see any photos of you unless it is critical to the case- as in the judge, jury, defendant and counsel.

I hope for Abby and Libby’s sake (their privacy and dignity after death) that this doesn’t go to trial but with the defendant pleading NOT GUILTY it is certainly headed toward a VERITABLE THREE RING CIRCUS INDEED.

That is awful. I have seen in many other cases where they have shown to the jury only.

 

[Jealoushe]

Isn't there a court date in Jan too?

Kks trial is January. This one is March.

 

[Jillyg]

Question. Surely Judge gull will look at the PC doc. Immediately. If she finds it was sealed in error and not accordance with statutes, can she unseal it? Would she have to wait until the 22?

 

[scapa]

How long did we have to wait to see Barry Morphew’s AA? Months.. I don’t get why everyone is so shocked, it’s not uncommon to not release the affidavits right away. Potentially giving time to the state to protect possible witnesses is my guess at why they want this sealed for awhile longer.

Agree that sealing an AA isn't uncommon -- whether it should be more uncommon is an argument for better lawyers and ethicists than me -- but IIRC in the Morphew case one rationale for sealing involved the impact it might have on SM's family members and specifically on her young daughters. Also IIRC, there was a lively discussion on whether this sort of harm should be a consideration under the laws as written.

NOTE: I'm not advocating for unsealing at any cost, and I grew up and live in countries with robust sub judice laws, but I wonder what our WS lawyers make of the citing of "survivor impact" considerations in conjunction with possible damage to investigation or unrelated parties, etc.

NOTE 2: I absolutely get the horror and pain that the release of case details can cause, having experienced it via family cases. Just not clear about whether those harms can be factored un legally.

 

[Hoss569]

The one inch core sample in RAs back yard had to have been for a specific reason in the SW.
If the location was indicated by a metal detector for a small object I think the would have carefully used a shovel to find what the detector alerted to.
A core sample is more like trying to find an old burn pit location or a buried tarp or sheer of plywood.

I thought pretty specific as well and my first thought was looking for possible other victims or reasons to dig.

 

[Jillyg]

Isn't there a court date in Jan too?

That is the pre trial hearing for RA.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Yes! Ok I was going off angela ganote saying the reason for the change was lack of resources in cc court and that ftwayne facilities were better and able to handle the case.

I wondered if Indiana law allowed that for high profile cases for some reason.

However, I'm not linking her comment because that isn't correct.
The recusal doesn't seem to give that reason for the request.
So things make a lot more sense to me now.

Link please. I haven't seen her say that.

 

[Catchinglisk]

Interesting observation. But you would have expected charges on that case as well if this were correct, right?

Only thing I can think of is someone turned him in cause they knew something. Maybe be his wife or an accomplice. Hard to imagine dna would be in the car after so many years let alone if he had that car than

 

[fred&edna]

Somethings I have been wondering about.

1. If L and A's deaths are the result of some kind of [insert word] 'ring', is there a chance that other local people are also involved in this 'ring' and;
2. Does the fact that the probable cause document is sealed prevent RA from sharing his copy of that document with various potential defence counsel?

I think number 2 is my main concern. RA is entitled to legal counsel and if it can be shown in any way that access has been prevented, that opens avenues to all sorts of mischief down the road. How secure is the paperwork handed to RA?

I share your concerns! This is why I keep asking questions regarding RA's legal counsel. At the moment, I don't care if the probable cause is sealed from the public. However, it would seem VERY troublesome if RA's attorney can't even view the PCA... that doesn't seem to be our legal process (but, IANAL) so maybe there's something I'm missing.

 

[Jealoushe]

That is the pre trial hearing for RA.

right ok thank you. So this is where details would come out first if not beforehand. Then KKs trial shortly after.