Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #162

[Betty P]

ppl still bringing up KAK interrogations CLAIMS as facts
we dont know if they girls went there to meet anyone.. thats just an a assumption
..and we have the MS to thank for it

What does "MS" refer to? TIA

 

[MistyWaters]

I don't think there is anything to clear up with RA being the accused murderer. We have the affidavit.


That has nothing to do with your claims that there are "facts" and "compelling evidence" about KK. Also, in my opinion, since KK is finally off the table as BG, some are still looking for a way to connect him to RA and/or the murders.

Agreed. RA was local and lived close enough to the trails to know that young girls went there for walks without needing an out-of-town third party to make any arrangements for him. IMO it’s as uncomplicated as RA took advantage of an opportunity that day, who knows how long he stalked the trails waiting for that time until he chose to act. Libby and Abby weren’t specifically targeted but sadly they had the misfortune of crossing his path. JMO

 

[GoBuckeyes]

JMO, another piece of compelling evidence against RA is the fact he went to the bridge at the exact time the girls had scheduled a meet up with the "catfishing" creep on Snapchat. Add to the fact he looked like the sketch, looked like the guy seen wearing bloody clothes, etc.

Jurors do pay attention to digital evidence these days. It's too much of a coincidence that he appeared on the bridge, looking like the killer at the exact time the girls had scheduled a meeting. JMO, that evidence exceeds the "reasonable doubt" test.

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911? If I see that, I consider that the man likely has lost his cell phone or doesn't have one, else why would he be on foot in that condition? So, I call authorities who can safely render aid. The fact that she didn't, makes her story less believable to me. Even if she didn't have a cellphone, she could have called as soon as she was able.

 

[Betty P]

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911? If I see that, I consider that the man likely has lost his cell phone or doesn't have one, else why would he be on foot in that condition? So, I call authorities who can safely render aid. The fact that she didn't, makes her story less believable to me. Even if she didn't have a cellphone, she could have called as soon as she was able.

I'm confused. I'll clearly state that I believe RA was the killer of Abby and Libby and I believe the state has the evidence to convict him. I'm getting mixed messages here from everyone else posting right now. Can anyone clarify? TIA

ETA: Maybe its the full moon, but whatever I post you folks disagree. Yes, no, maybe?

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I'm confused. I'll clearly state that I believe RA was the killer of Abby and Libby and I believe the state has the evidence to convict him. I'm getting mixed messages here from everyone else posting right now. Can anyone clarify? TIA

I'm sorry, @Betty P. My post wasn't meant to comment directly on your post. My ADHD is bad today! Your post just referenced that witness, and I should have made my post a stand-alone post. I apologize.

 

[MistyWaters]

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911? If I see that, I consider that the man likely has lost his cell phone or doesn't have one, else why would he be on foot in that condition? So, I call authorities who can safely render aid. The fact that she didn't, makes her story less believable to me. Even if she didn't have a cellphone, she could have called as soon as she was able.

The credibility of this witness will also be dependant on when she gave this statement to LE. I’d think a day later would be more credible that a week or more. That a friend later spoke to the media about the “man in black” makes me wonder how widely word had spread around town regarding the sightings of the three girls that day.

Assuming there will be a trial, I’d be surprised if a conviction will be primarily reliant on any witness testimony especially considering the fact nobody conclusively ID’d the man as RA. The prosecution will require stronger evidence to connect him to the actual crime scene otherwise I’d think there is plenty of room for reasonable doubt. Saying that I’m not doubting they have it, we will just have to wait.

 

[Betty P]

I'm sorry, @Betty P. My post wasn't meant to comment directly on your post. My ADHD is bad today! Your post just referenced that witness, and I should have made my post a stand-alone post. I apologize.

No problem. This has been a frustrating case with, JMO, too much meddling by true crime folks. Too many rumors, leaked documents, bad information, good information that is called bad information, etc. Too many podcasts and You Tube videos


Fortunately, I haven't followed that stuff.

 

[Betty P]

The credibility of this witness will also be dependant on when she gave this statement to LE. I’d think a day later would be more credible that a week or more. That a friend later spoke to the media about the “man in black” makes me wonder how widely word had spread around town regarding the sightings of the three girls that day.

Assuming there will be a trial, I’d be surprised if a conviction will be primarily reliant on any witness testimony especially considering the fact nobody conclusively ID’d the man as RA. The prosecution will require stronger evidence to connect him to the actual crime scene otherwise I’d think there is plenty of room for reasonable doubt. Saying that I’m not doubting they have it, we will just have to wait.

Most of the trials I've followed lately (Murdaugh, Wagners/Rhoden murders), prosecutors put all the evidence together and connect it to the defendant. They set up the timelines starting before the murders, connecting the evidence (witness reports, security cam footage, other witnesses seeing events happen around the crime scene, digital evidence, etc. They do the same thing with the crime scene itself, then afterwards. It's the totality of all the evidence linked together that convinces the jurors.

State knows how solid their witness evidence needs to be. I don't see them using that woman's story if they didn't think it could stand up to defense cross examination. JMO

 

[sandy_80]

What does "MS" refer to? TIA

murder sheet ...

 

[sandy_80]

You're right. KK and RA are both innocent and the killer will never be found. Just kidding.

I need to follow my old practice of staying out of these kind of threads until the trial begins.

do you think there is any chance that KAK is involved .. yet he isnt charged till now ?
and why hadn't he flipped on RA ...instead of leading them a wild goose chase to frame his dad !
just saying..nothing of it makes sense starting from square one...that their trip was not planned..we been here before

 

[MistyWaters]

Most of the trials I've followed lately (Murdaugh, Wagners/Rhoden murders), prosecutors put all the evidence together and connect it to the defendant. They set up the timelines starting before the murders, connecting the evidence (witness reports, security cam footage, other witnesses seeing events happen around the crime scene, digital evidence, etc. They do the same thing with the crime scene itself, then afterwards. It's the totality of all the evidence linked together that convinces the jurors.

State knows how solid their witness evidence needs to be. I don't see them using that woman's story if they didn't think it could stand up to defense cross examination. JMO

The woman’s story along with other witnesses strongly supported the arrest of RA IMO. But we cannot assmue the information contained within that same PCA will be reflective of the evidence presented during a trial. It’s commonly said that trial evidence to convict must be at a higher standard than what’s required to support an arrest.

Legal Burdens of Proof in Indiana | Indianapolis Attorneys

Don't let your questions bother you any longer.This blog takes a quick look at Indiana's different legal burdens of proof.

banksbrower.com

 

[Betty P]

The woman’s story along with other witnesses strongly supported the arrest of RA IMO. But we cannot assmue the information contained within that same PCA will be reflective of the evidence presented during a trial. It’s commonly said that trial evidence to convict must be at a higher standard than what’s required to support an arrest.

.
Yes, that's true. We still don't know what evidence the state has. I don't see them going to trial in such a well known case if they don't have the evidence to back it up. Ditto for the feds and others who have helped them out.

 

[Marzipan]

I'm confused. I'll clearly state that I believe RA was the killer of Abby and Libby and I believe the state has the evidence to convict him. I'm getting mixed messages here from everyone else posting right now. Can anyone clarify? TIA

ETA: Maybe its the full moon, but whatever I post you folks disagree. Yes, no, maybe?

I’m agreeing with you on everything except the point you made about an exact time for an arranged meetup. I might even agree that it happened, just not that we actually know it did.
I’m glad you are here. Btw, I’m the opposite—I sorta drop out of the threads when the case goes to trial. I don’t know why —maybe just too tired by then to do anything but watch/read the news about it.

 

[NoSpoonFeeding]

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911?

The witness spoke with LE on February 13, 2017. Therefore I think her observations are probably her honest recollection. The affidavit says walking, on the north side of 300 N, not stumbling out of the woods.
And she put him in the correct location to be headed for his car. She would not have known anything about the car from the news. We don't have her exact words as said to LE, but the affidavit said "bloody and muddy" and it "appeared that he had gotten into a fight". I don't see that as giving her concern for his condition, maybe he gave no indication he was in pain or injured by the way he walked. I think a lot of people would think it was none of their business and wouldn't want to "bother" 911.

page 4 of 8

Cause of death in Delphi murders still unknown, but document links Richard Allen to scene

The documents indicate that Allen is charged with felony murder, alleging he committed the killings while kidnapping Libby German and Abby Williams.

www.indystar.com

 

[Emma Peel]

IMO,
It's okay to consider various defense tactics.

Ask Casey Anthony how much a jury enjoys a red herring.

 

[Prime8]

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911? If I see that, I consider that the man likely has lost his cell phone or doesn't have one, else why would he be on foot in that condition? So, I call authorities who can safely render aid. The fact that she didn't, makes her story less believable to me. Even if she didn't have a cellphone, she could have called as soon as she was able.

There is nothing that says she saw him "stumble out of the woods", "she was traveling East on 300 North on February 13th, 2022 and observed a male subject walking west, on the North side of 300 North, away from the Monon High Bridge. [Redacted] advised that the male subject was wearing a blue colored jacket and blue jeans and was muddy and bloody. She further stated, that it appeared he had gotten into a fight." If someone doesn't indicate they are in distress or tries to flag you down, I don't know think it's unreasonable that she wouldn't call 911. As a women driving alone, I'm definitely not stopping for someone in this situation. If they indicated to me they needed help, then I would call 911.

 

[Gemmie]

There is nothing that says she saw him "stumble out of the woods", "she was traveling East on 300 North on February 13th, 2022 and observed a male subject walking west, on the North side of 300 North, away from the Monon High Bridge. [Redacted] advised that the male subject was wearing a blue colored jacket and blue jeans and was muddy and bloody. She further stated, that it appeared he had gotten into a fight." If someone doesn't indicate they are in distress or tries to flag you down, I don't know think it's unreasonable that she wouldn't call 911. As a women driving alone, I'm definitely not stopping for someone in this situation. If they indicated to me they needed help, then I would call 911.

Agreed. I've seen zero statements that a witness saw RA stumbling out of the woods. What I have seen is from the affidavit:



Due to that I think the stumbling comment was the OP's opinion ("paraphrasing"). IMO I think it very much skewed the facts which we should stick to, IMO.

Affidavit for those that haven't read it: https://s3.documentcloud.org/docume...-richard-m-allen-delphi-murders-affidavit.pdf

All MOO!

 

[Boxer]

The witness spoke with LE on February 13, 2017. Therefore I think her observations are probably her honest recollection. The affidavit says walking, on the north side of 300 N, not stumbling out of the woods.
And she put him in the correct location to be headed for his car. She would not have known anything about the car from the news. We don't have her exact words as said to LE, but the affidavit said "bloody and muddy" and it "appeared that he had gotten into a fight". I don't see that as giving her concern for his condition, maybe he gave no indication he was in pain or injured by the way he walked. I think a lot of people would think it was none of their business and wouldn't want to "bother" 911.

page 4 of 8

Cause of death in Delphi murders still unknown, but document links Richard Allen to scene

The documents indicate that Allen is charged with felony murder, alleging he committed the killings while kidnapping Libby German and Abby Williams.

www.indystar.com

Absolutely.
To notice but not to meddle seems normal.

 

[steeltowngirl]

It should be understandable that some of us are still considering KAK’s involvement. There have been many twists and turns in the information released in this case. Prosecution hinted at others possibly being involved. Libby communicated with the A_Shots account just prior to the murders, and KAK was linked to that profile. Perhaps we will know more after KAK’s trial. AFAIK, no one else has been officially cleared of involvement. JMO

On November 11th 2022, Doug Carter (Superintendent of the Indiana State Police & well known leader & figurehead of the Delphi Murders investigation) visited the Hammer & Nigel Show at the 93.1 WIBC studio

DOUG CARTER: We’ll continue to work… work on Kegan Kline, and whatever his connectivity might be to Abby and Libby and… almost 2100 days ago. So we will continue to work towards that.

At 8:05

ISP Superintendent Doug Carter - Hammer + Nigel Show Podcast

 

[FromGermany1]

Regarding the witness who (paraphrasing) saw a guy stumble out of the woods all bloody, I don't understand why she didn't call 911? If I see that, I consider that the man likely has lost his cell phone or doesn't have one, else why would he be on foot in that condition? So, I call authorities who can safely render aid. The fact that she didn't, makes her story less believable to me. Even if she didn't have a cellphone, she could have called as soon as she was able.

Now I wonder, if this witness is the one, who saw "a man doing something (namely walking around bloody/muddy like after a fight)", she thought should better be reported to police. It might be the same witness, who saw the man, and it was the YOUNG-BG. Can that be true or does it not fit together?