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

[Emma Peel]

Ding, ding, ding.

It was decided at the time... no time for second thoughts.

IMO, Judge is just moving the case on after the decisions were made

IMO, Gull's not simply moving the case on; she's starting the D's case over with a 10 month pause.

 

[photographer4]

Well sure. She doesn't have a choice.

Remember Gull to Rozzi: "So what's happened in the last 12 days"?

adding: I got that quote from MS (as many have). MS gave a Tuesday report, play by play, and Aine described a 2 minute stare down w/ Rozzi at the Defense table w/ RA, and then Gull said "so what's happened ..." Aine made it sound quite dramatic. Said Gull was like steel. Rozzi a bit rattled.

mmm hmm. Gull knew what happened. She was sitting on the notice from the Supreme Court.

JMHO

I'd pay actual cold hard cash to have seen her face when the SC got involved. LMAO.

 

[twall]

The order from the 10/31 hearing is on the docket now if someone wants to c&p it here. I would do it but I'm on my phone.

Edited to correct date

 

[photographer4]

It's definitely extreme for him. He was going to trial in a few months, now it's reset for almost a year. I'm sure it was devastating. It's also devastating to the families of Libby and Abby who have been and are in an emotional prison.

The families will be in emotional prison for the rest of their lives, no matter what happens ever in this case. There is no "justice" for the girls or the families left behind. Nothing brings them back and undoes that horrible day. I feel bad that the trial has been delayed yes, but at the same time, I'm more worried that the lack of a speedy trial may infringe upon RA's rights. What exactly IS a speedy trial anyhow? Seems a rather subjective term at best given the years and years an accused could be waiting for his day in court.

 

[MistyWaters]

Wienekelo is the law firm bringing the Alan case to the Supreme Court


https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1719834314462908871?s=20



https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1719767436432412711?s=20



https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1719847661669355827?s=20




https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1719846880085991667?s=20


wthr.com/delphi

Nothing filed as of yet. If it thudded there‘s various reasons why.
The law firm changed their mind after B&R acknowledged their withdrawal from the case.
B&R does not want their dirty laundry (aka gross negligence) aired in public.
B&R never intended to represent RA pro bono on a longterm basis anyway, considering they‘d already withdrawn from the case.
RA no longer wants the representation of B&R pro bono or not, since he’s not paying for his defense regardless.

JMO

 

[twall]

New entries. It's a guess as which this granting refers to.
I'm getting a bit lost now; I thought the representation issue was settled at the hearing on the Oct 19th according to JG.

11/02/2023	Automated ENotice Issued to Parties Order Granting ---- 11/1/2023 : Andrew Joseph Baldwin;Bradley Anthony Rozzi;Nicholas Charles McLeland;Robert Cliff Scremin;William Santino Lebrato
11/02/2023	Automated Paper Notice Issued to Parties Order Granting ---- 11/1/2023 : James David Luttrull

It was probably in relation to this:

11/01/2023

Order Granting Order granting withdrawal of counsel Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Scremin, Robert Cliff Noticed: Lebrato, William Santino Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Order Signed: 11/01/2023

I believe the order granting withdrawal of counsel pertains to D. Hennessy. JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

I believe the order granting withdrawal of counsel pertains to D. Hennessy. JMO

B & R have been deleted as Parties to the Case. Their names appeared earlier this morning so that’s who I’d say the court is granting withdrawal for.

Curious if this also indicates RA‘s consensus to his new D.



JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

Nothing filed as of yet. If it thudded there‘s various reasons why.
The law firm changed their mind after B&R acknowledged their withdrawal from the case.
B&R does not want their dirty laundry (aka gross negligence) aired in public.
B&R never intended to represent RA pro bono on a longterm basis anyway, considering they‘d already withdrawn from the case.
RA no longer wants the representation of B&R pro bono or not, since he’s not paying for his defense regardless.

JMO

Papers not due until Nov 9.
IMO, B&R already asked for their dirty laundry to be aired in public via the SC submission, where they also are airing Gull's dirty laundry. Their motion at the SC is for transparency which includes the chamber hearing and all issues related ... and Gull certainly can show the SC all her work/evidence/hearing/research/consult/law citations/deliberation in support of all her various decisions.

adding: Gull's clerks ... are her lawyers. She has help. FWIW

 

[girlhasnoname]

 

[twall]

B & R have been deleted as Parties to the Case. Their names appeared earlier this morning so that’s who I’d say the court is granting withdrawal for.

Curious if this also indicates RA‘s consensus to his new D.

View attachment 457693

JMO

Nope, it's for Hennessy.

 

[CGBSpender]

The families will be in emotional prison for the rest of their lives, no matter what happens ever in this case. There is no "justice" for the girls or the families left behind. Nothing brings them back and undoes that horrible day. I feel bad that the trial has been delayed yes, but at the same time, I'm more worried that the lack of a speedy trial may infringe upon RA's rights. What exactly IS a speedy trial anyhow? Seems a rather subjective term at best given the years and years an accused could be waiting for his day in court.

I agree with you on this. I will also add that the justice system is not designed for and/or meant to provide closure and/or healing to victims or their families. I think people who promote and champion the process as achieving justice for the victims and their families actually do those individuals a disservice...because the process can never provide the closure and healing that those victims seek. My heart truly breaks for the families of Abby and Libby. No legally sanctioned judgement will ever be adequate punishment for the monster(s) that killed these precious children.

I was raised in a deeply religious home, and have, as many do, often questioned the teachings of my youth (and still do at times)...and perhaps one day when my time on this earth is over I will learn that it was all BS, and I missed out on some fun as a result lol. In the meantime, though, I do appreciate that it provides me with hope that just maybe...a special place might exist after death for monsters that harm children...one that might offer the kind of suffering that is deserved, but that earthly punishment cannot provide.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

From Today's Order Issued above:

Out with R&B - That truly is good news for the entire case and even RA ultimately
The new Defense Team is Attorney of Record for RA
Old Defense Team must return all Discovery back to the State by EOW (tomorrow?) - I wonder how many more pics will be taken so they can tell their story or write their book? Don't forget the gag order boys.

Would they even be able to write a book considering Attorney/Client Privilege still holds? Maybe after the trial, IDK.

MOO

 

[Emma Peel]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>
I'll add: I'm referring to the SC response deadline .. Nov 9th. Those responses will be on the SC docket. Gull can show her work via her responses, she can limit her responses or she can go wide. IMO what she provides in response will be available for all to see. Hope that makes more sense.

one more edit - lol:
This is the firm that has already put in the SC review request to the SC, which was accepted by the SC, with that Nov 9th date for submissions from all parties involved.

 

[MistyWaters]

I agree with you on this. I will also add that the justice system is not designed for and/or meant to provide closure and/or healing to victims or their families. I think people who promote and champion the process as achieving justice for the victims and their families actually do those individuals a disservice...because the process can never provide the closure and healing that those victims seek. My heart truly breaks for the families of Abby and Libby. No legally sanctioned judgement will ever be adequate punishment for the monster(s) that killed these precious children.

I was raised in a deeply religious home, and have, as many do, often questioned the teachings of my youth (and still do at times)...and perhaps one day when my time on this earth is over I will learn that it was all BS, and I missed out on a some fun as a result lol. In the meantime, though, I do appreciate that it provides me with hope that just maybe...a special place might exist after death for monsters that harm children...one that might offer the kind of suffering that is deserved, but that earthly punishment cannot provide.

JMO

I can relate to your thoughts also. Families of murder victims have compared the trial process to be equally traumatic to the initial anguish from suddenly learning of their loved one’s death. It’s as if they’re forced to relive the tragedy a second time.

This case indeed makes it abundantly clear, the justice system is not about providing closure to the families.

JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1720054535270408692?s=20
this is from the SC case lawfirm's twitter (x) site,
on occasion they tweet answering Q's about what's been submitted under ALLEN, etc.

another:
https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1720053442222145703?s=20

The quotes below are from the above tweets. The law firm's explaining (briefly) some of its position in layman's terms. These are technical arguments about the law and it's framework designed to protect rights and ensures fairness (as well as can be).

IMO, interesting. Especially as it illustrates the nerdy side of the superior (supreme) court's watchdog role over judicial overreach. JMHO

Wieneke Law Office, LLC
@Wienekelo

Respectfully, it is not about the Judge. This is about the court's authority. We are a government of limited authority. A court can only act when it has been granted authority to do so.

Wieneke Law Office, LLC
@Wienekelo


Find a case in Indiana that allows for an attorney to be removed from a case for "gross negligence." I'll wait.

 

[Justice101]

Still following closely.

Thanks to all for posting.

 

[Emma Peel]

The Court also has many other remedies to manage/control/subdue over-zealous or poor judgement or sealing/gag-order violations concerning members of the Court.

Sanctions. Contempt of Court. Tighter Court guidelines/rules about filings. The power to block a brief and demand it be revised to meet court's briefing standards. The power to redact. The power to permit confidential filings. on and on and on.

I understand Gull took the Defense to task in the past for stuff she didn't like - good for her. But I'm not aware she'd ever assessed a Sanction, or found them in contempt.

JHMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Nope, it's for Hennessy.

Wow, that was a quick one. I can hardly keep up with all the new players on the D side.

 

[Ward Thisperer]

I've been wondering if The Innocence Project is following this case, for the oddities, if nothing else. Here they weigh in on tool mark analysis. This is from Dec, 2022

Thank you for linking this, I've been trying to look into reliability of unspent bullet identification in particular. It would be interesting to review other cases that relied on unspent bullet identification.

Wieneke has filed a limited appearance and a motion for transcripts




Wieneke on twitter:

Indiana allows attorneys to enter limited appearances when they need to "pop into" a case for a little matter and then pop right back out. My filings are pretty boring; I'm no David Hennessy...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1720127953437143497

 

[sunshineray]

It's my understanding that the gag order has nothing to do with the Franks motion. The gag order refers to extra-judicial statements. See pg 44 in the link.

I'd have to dig through a bunch of filings to show you the rules of sealing documents or you can look them up. We do have them and we need to be sure those rules are followed. Do you have any idea of how long records can be sealed and what it sometimes takes to get them unsealed?

After months of reading peoples' feelings about RA sitting in prison, it's good to suddenly see a little concern about his constitutional rights as an innocent man in the eyes of the law until proven guilty.

I have great concern for the girls' families, now and in the future.

Record of Proceedings.pdf

drive.google.com

So the topics under the gag order, discussing evidence like witnesses names and testimonies (like statements from depositions or affidavits) or evidence at the crime scene doesn't translate to any motions the defense may decide to file? I thought that was obvious because the judge sealed it shortly after it was filed publically. A little too late but sealed nonetheless.