IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #164

[mrjitty]

Anticipate it will be one of the days beginning with the week of Tuesday, June 20.
Reposting June 15 tweet (bbm) as a friendly reminder:

NEW: the judge in the Richard Allen case says her office will remove the seal from many documents that have been filed and kept secret.  The documents are going to be published on a website next week.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1669442918069817367

https://twitter.com/angelaganote

Be interesting to see what is released

 

[somequestions]

The one question that would bother me about the video in this case is:

How did the killer not see that Abby and Libby had a phone?

Whether he was hiding on the southeast side of the bridge because he never got off or if he started to walk back from the bridge, saw Abby and Libby, and then turned around, how did he not see the phone if he was watching them before he approached them? If Richard Allen was observing Abby and Libby, how did he not see Liberty German take a picture of Abigail Williams at 2:07 pm?

If Richard Allen planned the crime then I also cannot understand why he brought his own cell phone?

Maybe he did not think cell phone technology would play any role, and he also thought he had not been photographed?

 

[Megnut]

I think Libby had two phones, one her family knew about and one that had been provided to her, the danger of which she didn't appreciate. It probably felt... thrilling. I theorize that that second phone functioned, unbeknownst to her, as a transponder. I think her flight in real time was the "stock" RA was tracking. And I theorize further that this second phone was removed from the crime scene. IMO it was perhaps the only stroke of luck that day that the phone with the video was left behind.

I wonder if it was found, still pocketed, in discarded clothing. If the girls were ordered to undress, credit to Libby for keeping that phone concealed, away from the perpetrator, and available for LE to recover. That's some powerful wherewithal under impossible pressure.

Jmo

 

[Justice101]

I think Libby had two phones, one her family knew about and one that had been provided to her, the danger of which she didn't appreciate. It probably felt... thrilling. I theorize that that second phone functioned, unbeknownst to her, as a transponder. I think her flight in real time was the "stock" RA was tracking. And I theorize further that this second phone was removed from the crime scene. IMO it was perhaps the only stroke of luck that day that the phone with the video was left behind.

I wonder if it was found, still pocketed, in discarded clothing. If the girls were ordered to undress, credit to Libby for keeping that phone concealed, away from the perpetrator, and available for LE to recover. That's some powerful wherewithal under impossible pressure.

Jmo

That would be very interesting if true. But I doubt this was the case. 2 phones would be highly unusual and almost impossible to hide

 

[Justice101]

The one question that would bother me about the video in this case is:

How did the killer not see that Abby and Libby had a phone?

Whether he was hiding on the southeast side of the bridge because he never got off or if he started to walk back from the bridge, saw Abby and Libby, and then turned around, how did he not see the phone if he was watching them before he approached them? If Richard Allen was observing Abby and Libby, how did he not see Liberty German take a picture of Abigail Williams at 2:07 pm?

If Richard Allen planned the crime then I also cannot understand why he brought his own cell phone?

Maybe he did not think cell phone technology would play any role, and he also thought he had not been photographed?

I think he saw with the phone but she somehow managed to ditch the phone (or lost it) scrambling up the bank on the side of the creek.

When they ran from him, I think he probably lost sight of having to account for the phone until he was near the trees with them. He probably demanded the phone and Libby may have said she dropped or lost it, and that sent him into a further rage.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Unless we hear differently, I don't think killing them was planned. I can explain away the backed in car, I typically back in just because I prefer it.

RA has struck me as a hot head, just my theory, I think he walked to the bridge, started back, passed the girls and they said something or he thought they said something and they were giggling and he got pissed, he walked a bit further and realized no one else was going up the trail so he decided to teach them a lesson and things went down hill from there.

Yes he had a gun & knife on him, but that isn't all that unusual in the midwest. He

 

[Megnut]

If there was catfishing collusion ....

I think several things were occurring in stereo, leading up to the horrific events of that day.

Keep in mind that IMO and at most, I think Libby thought she had a vetted crush, older and remote. I think she may have encountered EmilyAnn and was sympathetic to the girl she believed her to be. Probably wanted to help her. In fact, if Libby expected to meet anyone that day, I think she might've thought she was meeting EmilyAnn. (And maybe she did. Only it wasn't EmilyAnn, it was the person using that account. I can't help but to wonder if an ugly two-way blackmail didn't develop between the user of A_S and the user of EmilyAnn. Extortionist, financier, tables turning.)

So.... Libby may have been looking for a time and place to meet Emily Ann, to offer friendship and support....

Meanwhile, a darker plan is being finalized. Get Libby a new phone. Walk her through the factory reset. History *poof*. No worries, new phone is only for a week and what history it is, it'll go *poof* too. The whole phone, in fact, will go *poof* and no one will be any the wiser because no one besides maybe Abby knew about it.... and she'd be going *poof* too.

There were many phones in circulation, I do believe. Key players each had at least two. I think KAK may have made a fatal error in using the secret phone to communicate with Libby at some point, so LE had a known point of contact between KAK and Libby but no Kline phone to go with it. IMO he was forced to produce the second phone, mysteriously appearing in the kitchen, conspicuously wiped.

That error may have been the beginning of the big, long, ugly unravel....

Because IMO the strategy was to use untraceable phones to triangulate communication that day. Two parties in the know, one (the minor), duped.

IMO BG was banking on his reputation. Just a guy at the park. With his nice tidy phone, nothing questionable on it. Second phone connected to KAK, CSAM, and Libby, via her second phone. And KAK, who messed up and crossed phones.

Otherwise, by 7 pm that night, I suspect there was a master strategy to destroy the three secret phones, silencing that conversation for all eternity.

Except for the cell dump. I wonder if two numbers didn't pop up, corresponding to no one. That may well be how RA got overlooked -- his personal phone number checked off. He wasn't "the guy" with the unknown phone number... it's just he had two.

I will not be shocked to learn at trial that those two unmatched phone numbers showed communication... exactly in the minutes before and after the commission of this set of crimes.

I still think it's possible too, that murder at the bridge was not in the plan. A controlled abduction, followed by captivity, SA, CSAM and ultimately death. KAK may have been blackmailing and pitting multiple players against one another.

If RA participated in the abduction piece under threat of being exposed, and the abduction went sideways, how far would he go to keep his reputation safe? Did he wind up killing them to protect himself from discovery?

And that's why KAK knew he was f'ed. The girls were supposed to be disappeared without a trace. Girls gone. Extra phones gone. Just one guy at the park who never saw them.... walks back to his car. No blood, no mud. Extrortion against him, settled.

But the girls fought back.

Coward killed them so he'd never be found out. It almost worked.

JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

The one question that would bother me about the video in this case is:

How did the killer not see that Abby and Libby had a phone?

Whether he was hiding on the southeast side of the bridge because he never got off or if he started to walk back from the bridge, saw Abby and Libby, and then turned around, how did he not see the phone if he was watching them before he approached them? If Richard Allen was observing Abby and Libby, how did he not see Liberty German take a picture of Abigail Williams at 2:07 pm?

If Richard Allen planned the crime then I also cannot understand why he brought his own cell phone?

Maybe he did not think cell phone technology would play any role, and he also thought he had not been photographed?

Just speculation, I think he attempted to destroy it and assumed that he had.


Way back, shortly after we all learned that Libby had actually caught their killer on video. We were told that they had experts come in to do work on the phone. They would not have needed that if no damage was done to it

.JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Unless we hear differently, I don't think killing them was planned. I can explain away the backed in car, I typically back in just because I prefer it.

RA has struck me as a hot head, just my theory, I think he walked to the bridge, started back, passed the girls and they said something or he thought they said something and they were giggling and he got pissed, he walked a bit further and realized no one else was going up the trail so he decided to teach them a lesson and things went down hill from there.

Yes he had a gun & knife on him, but that isn't all that unusual in the midwest. He

Of all the theories, that one makes the most sense to me as well, that he just ‘lost it‘ and spontaneously acted out his personal rage fuelled by his middle age and feelings of inadequacy and other inner most failings as presently reflected by his physical appearance of today. JMO

 

[Dhighsmith]

Any word on exactly when court docs will be made available?

 

[MistyWaters]

As interesting as it would be to see the SW, what LE hopes to find is of little significance compared to what actually was found during the search.

This could get interesting!

Judge promises release of Delphi documents this week

DELPHI, Ind. — Responding to a request filed by a podcaster and attorney, Allen County Judge Fran Gull announced that she would release some sealed documents in the Delphi murder case against…

fox59.com

“Greenlee said the details of several important documents have been kept from the public.

“With a search warrant there is usually a return filed and a return in a search warrant is basically a list of everything that was taken from the residence in question so it would be very interesting and informative for the public to see just what evidence was taken from the Allen residence,” he said….”

 

[twall]

Right, no Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity in IN, thank goodness.

This says Indiana does have a Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity option-

For nearly two centuries, the concept of the “insanity defense” has been debated and changed in Indiana’s Appellate Courts. Central to the debate is the recognition that, when a mental illness renders a person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the law excuses their would be criminal conduct. Left with answering the question whether a particular individual in any criminal case meets that criteria is the “trier of fact” or the jury or trial judge. But what exactly are they looking for and does any evidence carry more emphasis over others?

What Must You Prove?
As a general rule, the State of Indiana must prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a defendant. However, an individual may avoid criminal responsibility by invoking the insanity defense. Such a defense places an affirmative burden (meaning the defendant has the responsibility) to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence (a lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt) that: 1) They suffer from a mental disease or defect (or a severe abnormal mental condition that grossly and demonstrably impairs their perception) and 2) that the mental disease or defect rendered them unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct at the time of the offense. Important to note here is that proof of mental illness alone is not enough.

This defense is extremely important since an individual may ultimately be found: 1) Guilty (as any other criminal defendant), 2) Not Guilty (as any other criminal defendant) OR 3) Guilty but Mentally Ill (requiring an evaluation and treatment of mental illness during period of incarceration, however they are imposed the same criminal sentence as a standard conviction of guilt) 4) Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (which may result in an individual being ordered to a period of civil commitment if the trial judge finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person is mentally ill and either dangerous or gravely disabled.

What Is The "Insanity Defense" In Indiana

For nearly two centuries, the concept of the “insanity defense” has been debated and changed in Indiana’s Appellate Courts. Central to the debate is the recognition that, when a mental illness renders a person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the law excuses their would be criminal...

banksbrower.com

Also, I looked at the accused's docket named in the news article I cited as an example (E. Dorsey) in my previous post and he has a Safekeeping Order and is being held at IDOC pending trial (lots of transport orders). And a motion was granted for cameras in the June 2 hearing so Indiana is finally getting up to speed with media in the courtroom!

 

[Boxer]

I think Libby had two phones, one her family knew about and one that had been provided to her, the danger of which she didn't appreciate. It probably felt... thrilling. I theorize that that second phone functioned, unbeknownst to her, as a transponder. I think her flight in real time was the "stock" RA was tracking. And I theorize further that this second phone was removed from the crime scene. IMO it was perhaps the only stroke of luck that day that the phone with the video was left behind.

I wonder if it was found, still pocketed, in discarded clothing. If the girls were ordered to undress, credit to Libby for keeping that phone concealed, away from the perpetrator, and available for LE to recover. That's some powerful wherewithal under impossible pressure.

Jmo

They said the phone was found "in the area" of the CS.
Yes, I hope she ditched it secretly or hurled when he wasnt looking, and becane unfindable in the leaf litter.
Maybe looking for that phone is why BG stayed at the CS so long...until he heard the calling of DG and knew the search was on.
LGs phone did ring through for DG on first try at Wilson Bridge then went to vm for calls after, but the phone could have been on no ring, silent/no vibrate.

 

[Justice101]

Unless we hear differently, I don't think killing them was planned. I can explain away the backed in car, I typically back in just because I prefer it.

RA has struck me as a hot head, just my theory, I think he walked to the bridge, started back, passed the girls and they said something or he thought they said something and they were giggling and he got pissed, he walked a bit further and realized no one else was going up the trail so he decided to teach them a lesson and things went down hill from there.

Yes he had a gun & knife on him, but that isn't all that unusual in the midwest. He

That was exactly my theory from the get go very early on!

I think he was going to walk them down the hill just to get them off the bridge while he was thinking about how to punish them. I think one or both of the girls bolted across the creek and he panicked and chased them...eventually realizing he was in BIG trouble if he got caught. Thought the only way out was to permanently silence them both.

 

[FrostedGlass]

This says Indiana does have a Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity option-

For nearly two centuries, the concept of the “insanity defense” has been debated and changed in Indiana’s Appellate Courts. Central to the debate is the recognition that, when a mental illness renders a person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the law excuses their would be criminal conduct. Left with answering the question whether a particular individual in any criminal case meets that criteria is the “trier of fact” or the jury or trial judge. But what exactly are they looking for and does any evidence carry more emphasis over others?

What Must You Prove?
As a general rule, the State of Indiana must prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a defendant. However, an individual may avoid criminal responsibility by invoking the insanity defense. Such a defense places an affirmative burden (meaning the defendant has the responsibility) to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence (a lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt) that: 1) They suffer from a mental disease or defect (or a severe abnormal mental condition that grossly and demonstrably impairs their perception) and 2) that the mental disease or defect rendered them unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct at the time of the offense. Important to note here is that proof of mental illness alone is not enough.

This defense is extremely important since an individual may ultimately be found: 1) Guilty (as any other criminal defendant), 2) Not Guilty (as any other criminal defendant) OR 3) Guilty but Mentally Ill (requiring an evaluation and treatment of mental illness during period of incarceration, however they are imposed the same criminal sentence as a standard conviction of guilt) 4) Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (which may result in an individual being ordered to a period of civil commitment if the trial judge finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person is mentally ill and either dangerous or gravely disabled.

What Is The "Insanity Defense" In Indiana

For nearly two centuries, the concept of the “insanity defense” has been debated and changed in Indiana’s Appellate Courts. Central to the debate is the recognition that, when a mental illness renders a person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the law excuses their would be criminal...

banksbrower.com

Also, I looked at the accused's docket named in the news article I cited as an example (E. Dorsey) in my previous post and he has a Safekeeping Order and is being held at IDOC pending trial (lots of transport orders). And a motion was granted for cameras in the June 2 hearing so Indiana is finally getting up to speed with media in the courtroom!

Dorsey is the guy who shot and killed IMPD Officer Breann Leath and the prosecutor is seeking the death penalty. He sure doesn't have much on his record; do they have evidence of mental illness?

It's been a while since I looked at J. Oberhansley's case (murdered his gf and cannibalized parts of her body) but it seems like they just sent him to be treated for his mental illness and then brought him back for trial. He had some serious mental health issues. He was sentenced to LWOP.

 

[FromGermany1]

You're right, we don't know for sure that he's never murdered or assaulted anyone before. That's true. I personally think it was his first murder, but that's total speculation.

And what you're saying about him knowing the girls might be there is exactly where I'm at because the idea of this being random, from what we know now, just seems less likely to me than it did at the beginning. Imo, it does feel like an opportunistic crime, and not one well planned out, but also not a crime he had fantasized about and hunted on a regular basis around the trails waiting for the right opportunity. It feels instead like he knew on short notice that the girls would be leaving for the bridge soon, so he went to where he knew he could park, parked semi-concealed, walked with purpose to the bridge, went out on the bridge to scope out a spot to take them once he got them, likely hid and waited on the north end of the bridge until the girls stopped taking their photos atop the bridge, then crossed after them, cornering them on the south end. So however he knew they were coming, whether by snapchat or otherwise, it does feel to me like he knew, acted fast, and targeted them. JMO.

What kind of satisfaction was he hoping for (if this was the first time)??

 

[Boxer]

Just speculation, I think he attempted to destroy it and assumed that he had.


Way back, shortly after we all learned that Libby had actually caught their killer on video. We were told that they had experts come in to do work on the phone. They would not have needed that if no damage was done to it

.JMO

Not necessarily physical
damage, I thought that, MOO they meant that the footage was so motion scrambled and smeared It took FBI and Disney to get the pixels into their places for images.

 

[raja]

That was exactly my theory from the get go very early on!

I think he was going to walk them down the hill just to get them off the bridge while he was thinking about how to punish them. I think one or both of the girls bolted across the creek and he panicked and chased them...eventually realizing he was in BIG trouble if he got caught. Thought the only way out was to permanently silence them both.

Anyone who can cross the line from punishing 2 strangers to murder had that in him from the get go. I don’t think punishment was ever his intent. He had plans to do real harm in one way or another be it sexual assault or murder. His intent was far more evil than just punishment. Jmho

 

[TL4S]

Anyone who can cross the line from punishing 2 strangers to murder had that in him from the get go. I don’t think punishment was ever his intent. He had plans to do real harm in one way or another be it sexual assault or murder. His intent was far more evil than just punishment. Jmho

I agree, especially considering he left an "odd" crime scene with signatures, plus apparently spent quite some time there.

 

[Boxer]

Anyone who can cross the line from punishing 2 strangers to murder had that in him from the get go. I don’t think punishment was ever his intent. He had plans to do real harm in one way or another be it sexual assault or murder. His intent was far more evil than just punishment. Jmho

MOO a bit drunk, hostile, angry and possibly somewhat suicidal would cook up the arrogance and drive to kidnap some young girls walkingninto nowhere, with a half baked intent to rape and the murder was the natural outcome of kidnapping.