IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #170

[TL4S]

We know this from Brad Rozzi's praecipe. He is the one who alerted us to the fact that this was audio recorded when he asked for it. She ignored that filing and removed it from the record. I think it will come out. Under public records request any of us should be able to obtain it but it has to be made part of the record in order for it to even be found so take from that what you will. The audio may prove pivotal. You can't get tone from a written transcript but audio may prove to shed a completely different light on what occurred in there.

jmo

Defense Diaries said they were going to try to get this recording.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Defense Diaries said they were going to try to get this recording.

That would be good. It has to be attached to this case to be found so I hope she has thought the better of it and has since put it into the record so it can be located.

jmo

 

[AugustWest]

DBM

accidental post

 

[gophergirl50]

Yes, thank you, THAT's what I'm talkin' about.
But setting boundaries? That's work.
It's easier to just remove them.

Go back and read the gag order and show me where this violates the order?

Are they not allowed to put forth their theory of the defense in filings? The state put forth their case in the arrest warrant and search warrant affidavits. Which were unsealed. By Gull herself.

 

[Emma Peel]

Go back and read the gag order and show me where this violates the order?

Are they not allowed to put forth their theory of the defense in filings? The state put forth their case in the arrest warrant and search warrant affidavits. Which were unsealed. By Gull herself.

If Gull objects to confidentiality of content or form of the long memo/exhibits filing, she has the ability to send it back to Defense with guidance for revisions, and the reason. (apologies that my reply comment to another poster wasn't terribly clear.)

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Nice post, thanks.
MOO:
The issues with this case began long before these last few months. They go back to the beginning, which we have listed a number of times. There are things that are just off and some folks can hand-wave them away but some cannot.

Really, we knew almost nothing about this case until the D tried to bring the issues out in the open. They had a strange way of doing it. The hated memorandum has much to consider that we have not seen.

At this point, I am adamantly opposed to any more secrecy; there has been way, way too much. Each time something goes on behind closed doors, I become more suspicious. I don't think I'm alone in this.

Just my own opinion, but I don’t really think there is any deception or conspiracy going on.
BUT, I 100% agree that there should be no more secrecy of any kind in this case. Secrecy in this case has been slowly poisoning it since day one.
I believe it led to the case going unsolved for 5+ years. I believe it led to confusion and distrust. I believe it was the catalyst for wild SM speculation.
The secrecy that continued after the arrest only led to people wondering “what are you hiding from me”.
Secrecy is the poison, the antidote is surely sunshine. Here’s hoping for sunny days ahead!

 

[Salah11]

Just my own opinion, but I don’t really think there is any deception or conspiracy going on.
BUT, I 100% agree that there should be no more secrecy of any kind in this case. Secrecy in this case has been slowly poisoning it since day one.
I believe it led to the case going unsolved for 5+ years. I believe it led to confusion and distrust. I believe it was the catalyst for wild SM speculation.
The secrecy that continued after the arrest only led to people wondering “what are you hiding from me”.
Secrecy is the poison, the antidote is surely sunshine. Here’s hoping for sunny days ahead!

If secrecy protects the case then im all for it. This is about justice for two teenage girls and that should never be forgotten in the circus that this case has now become.

 

[MistyWaters]

grandstanding ... or ... creation of a public record?

A significant variable, once RA meets with his newly appointed attorneys he may be ready to say a final good bye to R&B, or…let’s turn the page. They could still fight the definition of gross negligence but their trespasses (blatant lies? > not good) would become public knowledge, then there’s Bar complaints to be concerned about, and as they wouldn’t be put back on the case anyway, what’s the point..….?

 

[sunshineray]

Given Hennessy’s dramatically unhelpful behaviour in the courtroom during the hearing yesterday he probably got fired!

So do you think B "coerced" him into withdrawing or he'd fire him for his lack courtroom decorum?
Nahhhhh, never mind, no need to answer.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I appreciate this post @Jurisprudence. I've been milling this around in my mind since the 19th, that AB and BR seem to be in this for more reasons than just becoming famous, or just because they are jerks. JMO. I think it is reasonable to consider that they believe he is innocent, and/or the rules are not being followed by the other side.

Some of their filings come across as distasteful to a lot of folks (POW, Odinist, etc), and I totally get that (and agree). But I felt like BM from Defense Diaries made a valid point yesterday when he pointed to the fact that at the Oct. 19th hearing, the P had along several members of ISP and other witnesses to testify in regards to the leak, but because JG had not given the D any kind of list of items that would be covered at the hearing, they had no way to prepare with witnesses on their own behalf (I'm not counting H). They likely knew the hearing would revolve around the leak, of course, but that isn't the same as a court record of what would be going on at the hearing. That record, asfaik, does not exist, thus their argument of being "ambushed." RA's guilt/innocence is irrelevant at this point, IMO. I know I'll get put in my place here for saying all of that, but as I've said before, listening to the views of both prosecutors and defense attorneys has me stuck squarely in the middle.

Defense Diaries also said we haven't heard the last from AB and BR, so we shall see...

I hope nobody feels like it's okay to put anyone in their place @TL4S. I appreciate your thoughtful posts and your perspectives. We've been here a long time and been through one crap show after another - for years. This case has been so far from effectively run, that I can't even begin.

I honestly believe we all just want justice for Abby & Libby in the long run. Getting to that has been, and will be, painful for who knows how much longer? I'm here for the duration, I know you are as well. We all may differ in opinions, but we all want the same outcome...the person responsible for murdering these 2 innocent young girls to pay for this horrible crime so they can rest in peace and their families and loved ones may begin the healing process. I don't believe in the word 'closure'. These families and loved ones will learn how to move forward without them knowing justice has been served.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Interesting that they are noticing Baldwin and Rossi.

jmo

DBM

 

[sunshineray]

From 882, revised for clarity and correct court from appellate division to Indiana Supreme Court:

The attorneys who filed this are representing the people in a way (including us and our access to records) and the state (for violations of statutes by JG). They are doing it/captioning it in his name because it is his case docket and Judge Gull's tampering with it that is at issue. They aren't speaking to the merits of RA's case in any way, or to the issue of Rozzi and Baldwin's removal except to explain how and when this started. The exhibits are replete with RA, Baldwin and Rozzi references and docs bc primarily it is their information which is being stricken. They are speaking solely to a violation of state law by the Judge in the way she is removing things from the docket, moving other documents out of order (detaching them from docs they correspond with), and keeping still other documents she doesn't like hidden from the public without any formal order sealing them or stating the reason(s) why she hiding them from the public.

The attorneys are bringing to the attn of the state Sup Ct that the Judge, by taking it upon herself to mess with the docket and the CCS (chronological case summary), is not only preventing public access but in the process she's also destroying the defendant's record for appeal (a complete record is needed for appeal). They are asking the court to hear them and order this stopped and fixed. They would normally need to make this ask to Gull first. But Gull has refused to accept filings so they tell the court they realize they skipped this step but please find an exception to hear us because she's not acknowledging filings and this is a matter of great public importance.

jmo

ETA: Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

I don't know if the judge is "hiding" documents because she " doesn't like" them and isn't the reason for removal of some of those documents because they were filed when B&R were no longer RA's attorneys as they had withdrawn?

 

[StarryStarryNight]

If secrecy protects the case then im all for it. This is about justice for two teenage girls and that should never be forgotten in the circus that this case has now become.

I think you misunderstood my post.

 

[sunshineray]

Interesting -- thanks.

I can't really follow the logic here, though that has been true of this case for a long time now.

We have seen some absolute nutters represent themselves in some very high-profile trials. We have seen knowledgeable judges lecture and caution those defendants about the significant risks of this step and assign advisors -- have we seen a case in which a judge denies this right, however much it might seem to NOT be in the best interests of said defendant?

It would seem to follow then that a judge who believes that a counsel is representing a client poorly, even with "gross negligence," might be very specific in open court with her reservations about them and the degree to which they might impede and even actively harm a case, providing the defendant with a difficult choice, but this falls short of ordering them removed from the case.

I have no particular opinion about B and R, though I was bewildered by the F motion and appalled by the seeming evidence breach. Still, that breach might and should have been handled by the court in-house, without the public fallout all but guaranteed by the revelations of podcasters, YTers, commentators, etc.

At this point, I'd argue that the case itself should be sequestered off from the media circus surrounding it, if at all possible. That likely means new venue, new judge, new counsel, and a strict timeline for discovery and trial prep.

I also wonder how much the various sealings and secrecy about the case going back years has helped to stoke the fires of media interest and exasperation. Perhaps greater transparency -- exlucing of course sensitive materials like CS photos, etc -- makes this a less "live" option for those who might exploit it for profit or out of a conviction that the events need some sunlight.

If this case proceeds as is, whoever the D counsel are, I worry that it will be forever tainted by the last few months. Who is likely to believe now that justice will have been done with ex-counsel and their defenders, interested parties, transparency advocates and maybe the conspiracist fringe casting doubt on every ruling, all the way along?

It will be forever tainted and in my opinion that lays at the feet of RA's former defense attorneys. I don't think the judge or prosecutor uses the language "gross negligence" lightly or without purpose. AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

Aren't B&R the filing complainants? Wouldn't that be normal procedure? IANAL serious question.

No those three new attorneys filed with SC, not B&R.

 

[MistyWaters]

If secrecy protects the case then im all for it. This is about justice for two teenage girls and that should never be forgotten in the circus that this case has now become.

Yes part of the problem is the notoriety the case had attracted and IMO it began with the reward and 1000s of people forming private FB groups trying to solve the case. From there on it seemed an unusual tendency sprouted - the more information that was released, the more people wanted to know, it was never enough. Even the leaks could be attributed to people wanting to know.

If there is no secrecy then I doubt anybody will ever be successfully prosecuted since it would become impossible to find an impartial jury and it increases the risk of a mistrial. I’m fine with how things stand now and for the circus to end.

 

[MistyWaters]

Aren't B&R the filing complainants? Wouldn't that be normal procedure? IANAL serious question.

No the complaint is about public access to accurate court files.

B and R haven’t filed a complaint.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I really appreciate your taking time to share these thoughts; I agree with your views.

If LE could summarize their 5 (?) years of investigation lines and their professional conclusions (redacted as appropriate), perhaps the Defense (and social media) would have had less room to speculate.

What's preventing such a reconciliation? Active investigations? Or Ego?

Whatever it is, it's literally the Defense's job to mine it for reasonable doubt.

JMHO.

A gag order was issued by the Judge, whether we like it or not. The State has abided by it, the Defense has done nothing but sneaky run arounds. They proposed a theory, named many actual individuals (putting some at potential risk), disclosed sensitive and exploitive CS material (93) pages alone on the arrangements and dressing of the innocent victims under the guise of a 136 page Memo for Franks Hearings filed at 2:04 am. They did that purposely just so it would be leaked before the Judge could pull it back and seal it. All while acting that was not a wrong thing.

A close friend of AB's is the ahem, admitted leaker, that led to one of the parties in the following dissemination chain to die by suicide. This is as serious as it gets, why might he have been so scared that he would kill himself? I think we'll learn it's for far more serious implications than we are privy to at this point.

That is all gross misconduct by any Attorney D or P in my book all day long and I'm glad they're off the case. I think the ISC will also agree. If they're capable of this type I can only imagine what they would be up to during the actual trial?!

RA deserves better than this as do the families of the victims and citizens of Delphi.

JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

A significant variable, once RA meets with his newly appointed attorneys he may be ready to say a final good bye to R&B, or…let’s turn the page. They could still fight the definition of gross negligence but their trespasses (blatant lies? > not good) would become public knowledge, then there’s Bar complaints to be concerned about, and as they wouldn’t be put back on the case anyway, what’s the point..….?

R & B seem more like happy warriors than cowards. JMO FWIW

 

[girlhasnoname]

No the complaint is about public access to accurate court files.

B and R haven’t filed a complaint.

Ok, I thought this was their complaint against their withdrawal and Judge G's recusal.