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

[Batgirl 2.0]

MS also discussed the troubling courtroom conduct of AB's lawyer friend, H. What are these guys thinking? Is it all about theatrics? I don't understand.

I have my suspicions that in both the 19th and the 31st hearings, JG and NMcL had concerns about the D's conduct possibly requiring LE intervention. According to BR, on the 19th, when they were "ambushed" in chambers, JG reminded them that ISP would be sitting behind them in court. I know that's probably because ISP would testify toward the leak investigation, but their presence would also be intimidating, I think. And I don't recall if it was in an article, or MS where I heard NMcL pointed the D out to the bailiffs yesterday, prior to JG coming into the courtroom. I realize this is probably because the ex-D were sitting by RA when they were supposedly off the case, but still... these guys are pushing it, IMO.

I get that a lot of folks think the ex-D are just out for fame in a high profile case, but thier conduct seems to be jeopardizing both their careers entirely. Why would they do all this? It doesn't seem to be good for anyone, including them or RA.

JMO.

I share your suspicions.

 

[MistyWaters]

Murder Sheet

The Murder Sheet is a weekly true crime podcast hosted by journalist Áine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee. We take a journalistic approach to covering true crime. We have broken national news on major cases, like the Delphi murders and the Burger Chef murders. We also cover plenty of other...

art19.com

Yesterday at 12:50 PM

The Delphi Murders: Andrew Baldwin and Bradley Rozzi and William Lebrato and Robert Scremin and David Hennessy for the Defense​

We attended today's hearing in the Delphi murders case, and will relate everything we saw and heard.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Exhibit O Starting at Page 229:

On Oct 19th Both Baldwin and Rozzi agreed to withdraw in the Judge's chambers. There is audio recordings (thank heavens). At that moment, they were no longer legally Attorney of Record for Defendant Allen, period.

Rozzi states the withdrawal was coerced, "quit or I'll read the allegations in public on the record...."

But wait, R&B were the ones who BEGGED for cameras in the courtroom, even filed a Motion in support of it. If they had nothing to hide and there was NO MERIT to the Judge's allegations, why not defend themselves in open court and get it on the record??????? It would have made them appear like the rock stars they believe they are and made the Judge look incompetent, like they want us to believe she is.

They state they have over 50 years of combined legal 'expertise', how in world do you coerce 2 Defense attorneys who have done absolutely nothing in regards to gross misconduct into withdrawal off a case if they know they didn't do anything wrong? Umm, you don't.

They didn't want their dirty laundry aired in public and their reputations compromised, but fellas, it's far too late for that. You've done that already for yourselves.

Record of Proceedings.pdf

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

No, just the judge stating it. It appears arbitrary because we don't know how she made this finding, no hearing on the record with evidence and argument as you'd expect. The larger point is it doesn't matter if counsel was appointed, once an attorney/client relationship is established, the law takes interfering with that very seriously.

A Judge has a right to dismiss Court Appointed Attorneys of Record for gross misconduct. There was audio recording in the meeting with Rozzi and Baldwin. The charges of the leaks were investigated, I'm pretty sure that's how Judge Gull came to her decision.

Judge Gull would have taken everything under consideration before taking such a drastic measure at this stage in the trial. She didn't withdraw them from the case just because she didn't like them. She's a Superior Court Judge with 20 years of experience, why would she shoot herself in the foot so speak if there was no merit to these allegations?

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Eh, if they get famous for protecting a defendant's constitutional rights, more power to them.

Meh, I hate seeing anybody profit off the murders of underage children P or D. Just rubs me the wrong way.

MOO

 

[abams]

A Judge has a right to dismiss Court Appointed Attorneys of Record for gross misconduct. There was audio recording in the meeting with Rozzi and Baldwin. The charges of the leaks were investigated, I'm pretty sure that's how Judge Gull came to her decision.

Judge Gull would have taken everything under consideration before taking such a drastic measure at this stage in the trial. She didn't withdraw them from the case just because she didn't like them. She's a Superior Court Judge with 20 years of experience, why would she shoot herself in the foot so speak if there was no merit to these allegations?

MOO

Because she's not infallible and until it's on the record it's all just assumption or taking it on faith.

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, agreed.
Old D has a lot of confidence in their client's case.
(And some excellent appellate attnys confidently cleared their schedules last week in support of the Old D.)

And B's attorney H, who spoke before the court yesterday, withdrew from being his lawyer when he got back to Indianapolis.

"Four hours after leaving the courtroom and returning to Indianapolis, Hennessy filed a Withdrawal of Limited Appearance as Baldwin's attorney, indicating that, “judicial overreach,” rendered his continued representation “moot.”

Judge confirms defense attorney dismissals in Delphi double murder case

CARROLL COUNTY, Ind. — The latest hearing in the case against accused killer Richard Allen was due to start at 9 a.m. in the third-floor courtroom of Carroll Circuit Court in Delphi today. Al…

www.google.com

 

[MistyWaters]

According to MS, Hennessy‘s behaviour during the hearing was all very strange adding to the overall circus atmosphere prevailing over this case. Tell it better than I can describe it.

During the hearing ex-D confirmed they had withdrawn prior to last hearing, the reason the Judge asked them what had changed in 12 days.

One point of interest is they confirmed the Supreme Court filing pertains to public records and access for the sake of transparency, not reviewing whether D’s dismissal was justified. That could come later.

An interesting and informative podcast, worth listening to IMO.

JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

And B's attorney H, who spoke before the court yesterday, withdrew from being his lawyer when he got back to Indianapolis.

"Four hours after leaving the courtroom and returning to Indianapolis, Hennessy filed a Withdrawal of Limited Appearance as Baldwin's attorney, indicating that, “judicial overreach,” rendered his continued representation “moot.”

Judge confirms defense attorney dismissals in Delphi double murder case

CARROLL COUNTY, Ind. — The latest hearing in the case against accused killer Richard Allen was due to start at 9 a.m. in the third-floor courtroom of Carroll Circuit Court in Delphi today. Al…

www.google.com

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

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I did state "if". The investigation by ISP is still ongoing as to who did and when they did break any laws. I believe the D's office and it's personnel as well as a personal friend and former employee are within that investigation and have been interviewed.

As far as court rulings go I believe there were numerous times court-labeled confidental discovery information was leaked even though there was a gag order in place.

Let us also not forget that the leak involved defense strategy and the name of POI the defense was going to throw out there. Secondly, even before the leak was discovered the parties involved had a plan to frame someone the defense had involved in a previous “accidental” leak. Email in the document dump from yesterday from BR immediately put the attention on this same individual ( RS) How convenient and coincidental. Even though he was not the source of the leak.

 

[Emma Peel]

No, just the judge stating it. It appears arbitrary because we don't know how she made this finding, no hearing on the record with evidence and argument as you'd expect. The larger point is it doesn't matter if counsel was appointed, once an attorney/client relationship is established, the law takes interfering with that very seriously.

Because there was no hearing for D's Disqualification, we don't know exactly the Court's investigation/fact-finding that led to the Court's "findings" of gross negligence.

But it's become apparent via the submissions and narrative to the Supreme Court, Exhibit I therein, and in media reporting that the Prosecution was deeply involved in whatever process the Court used to determine those findings.

Question: Are there any conflicts with the Trial Prosecution counsel being tasked by the Trial Court to coordinate the investigation into that Prosecution counsel's trial adversary (the D) in the process laid out in the email chain:
- P charged by Court to be LE intermediary between the Court and LE investigation of the Leak,
- P then invited by Court to make recommendations to the Court wrt disqualifying the P
- P again invited to provide Court counsel with regard to denying RA his chosen private counsel?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Let us also not forget that the leak involved defense strategy and the name of POI the defense was going to throw out there. Secondly, even before the leak was discovered the parties involved had a plan to frame someone the defense had involved in a previous “accidental” leak. Email in the document dump from yesterday from BR immediately put the attention on this same individual ( RA). How convenient and coincidental. Even though he was not the source of the leak.

Absolutely, there's much more to this story than this poor little Defense team would have us believe. Can't wait until it all comes out.

I think RA would legitimately be served by new counsel. This D is a train wreck and have been from Day 1. Even if I believe RA is guilty, he deserves a vigorous and competent defense.

The most important thing is to get this all resolved so the case can move forward and there be justice for Abby & Libby.

MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

MS also discussed the troubling courtroom conduct of AB's lawyer friend, H. What are these guys thinking? Is it all about theatrics? I don't understand.

I have my suspicions that in both the 19th and the 31st hearings, JG and NMcL had concerns about the D's conduct possibly requiring LE intervention. According to BR, on the 19th, when they were "ambushed" in chambers, JG reminded them that ISP would be sitting behind them in court. I know that's probably because ISP would testify toward the leak investigation, but their presence would also be intimidating, I think. And I don't recall if it was in an article, or MS where I heard NMcL pointed the D out to the bailiffs yesterday, prior to JG coming into the courtroom. I realize this is probably because the ex-D were sitting by RA when they were supposedly off the case, but still... these guys are pushing it, IMO.

I get that a lot of folks think the ex-D are just out for fame in a high profile case, but thier conduct seems to be jeopardizing both their careers entirely. Why would they do all this? It doesn't seem to be good for anyone, including them or RA.

JMO.

I haven't listened to MS for a while now but I did this morning. AC seems to have toned down her obvious (to me) bias in favor of those on the prosecution side.

Her observation that the XDs seemed sad and defeated gave me a bit of a chuckle. I doubt that they walked in thinking they could change JG's mind. Do D's have a rule: When you're gritting your teeth mad, give the impression of depressed and sad.

MS did share that RA and KA are still communicating in court. I guess he's still her person.

What do you make of his change in appearance? I wonder what kind of meds they have given him since he's been in prison.

The Delphi Murders: Andrew Baldwin and Bradley Rozzi and William Lebrato and Robert Scremin and David Hennessy for the Defense

We attended today's hearing in the Delphi murders case, and will relate everything we saw and heard. Send tips to [email protected]. The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC .

art19.com

 

[Ward Thisperer]

Exhibit O Starting at Page 229:

On Oct 19th Both Baldwin and Rozzi agreed to withdraw in the Judge's chambers. There is audio recordings (thank heavens). At that moment, they were no longer legally Attorney of Record for Defendant Allen, period.

Rozzi states the withdrawal was coerced, "quit or I'll read the allegations in public on the record...."

But wait, R&B were the ones who BEGGED for cameras in the courtroom, even filed a Motion in support of it. If they had nothing to hide and there was NO MERIT to the Judge's allegations, why not defend themselves in open court and get it on the record??????? It would have made them appear like the rock stars they believe they are and made the Judge look incompetent, like they want us to believe she is.

They state they have over 50 years of combined legal 'expertise', how in world do you coerce 2 Defense attorneys who have done absolutely nothing in regards to gross misconduct into withdrawal off a case if they know they didn't do anything wrong? Umm, you don't.

They didn't want their dirty laundry aired in public and their reputations compromised, but fellas, it's far too late for that. You've done that already for yourselves.

Record of Proceedings.pdf

MOO

Here's the actual section that you are referencing:


Gull publicly shaming them and stating she had already decided to disqualify them no matter what they state in the record would harm their defense of Allen. If she is allowing cameras in the court only as a method of shaming the defense then I don't see why they would at all want to walk into that situation believing they would actually get a chance to air their side without any ability to prepare, and call witnesses (like they planned but were not allowed to do at yesterday's hearing).

Perhaps if you are correct and they wanted to appear as 'rock stars' as you interpret their actions, that is what they would have chosen, but going the route they did seems to be more indicative of lawyers who are actually concerned with staying on the case to defend their client.

Bob Motta of Defense Diaries said on stream yesterday he is planning to request the audio recording from the chambers on Oct 19th as apparently is the public's right to request in IN, which would bring some clarity to this matter.

 

[Emma Peel]

And B's attorney H, who spoke before the court yesterday, withdrew from being his lawyer when he got back to Indianapolis.

"Four hours after leaving the courtroom and returning to Indianapolis, Hennessy filed a Withdrawal of Limited Appearance as Baldwin's attorney, indicating that, “judicial overreach,” rendered his continued representation “moot.”

Judge confirms defense attorney dismissals in Delphi double murder case

CARROLL COUNTY, Ind. — The latest hearing in the case against accused killer Richard Allen was due to start at 9 a.m. in the third-floor courtroom of Carroll Circuit Court in Delphi today. Al…

www.google.com

I don't understand relevance?
H is not one of the appellate attnys that filed in SC last week.
Otherwise, IMO:
H withdrew a limited appearance from Gull's docket b/c he attended a hearing, he was blocked from being heard, after Gull made the decision re: RA's chosen private counsel, H did get his comments on the record. But they were not considered in Gull's decision; and H calls that judicial overreach.

Don't know if H is calling it a day and H's work here is done.
Or ... if that remark an indication that H intends to rep for an appeal related to what he characterizes as Gull's judicial overreach.

 

[sunshineray]

Because she's not infallible and until it's on the record it's all just assumption or taking it on faith.

If it was recorded in chambers it is on the record. It's just not been released publically.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I haven't listened to MS for a while now but I did this morning. AC seems to have toned down her obvious (to me) bias in favor of those on the prosecution side.

Her observation that the XDs seemed sad and defeated gave me a bit of a chuckle. I doubt that they walked in thinking they could change JG's mind. Do D's have a rule: When you're gritting your teeth mad, give the impression of depressed and sad.

MS did share that RA and KA are still communicating in court. I guess he's still her person.

What do you make of his change in appearance? I wonder what kind of meds they have given him since he's been in prison.

Thanks for a brief summary, I don't have the strength to listen to it today.

What did she describe RA's appearance as? It could be some type of meds for depression or anxiety. Some cause significant weight gain or loss depending on the person. I wonder if he's eating regularly or exercising?

I know I sound harsh and cynical, but I think he's purposely trying to alter his appearance from BG timeframe.

JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Just one more point the MS helped to clarify IMO - the Ex-D concern is not so much that a hearing wasn't held prior to their dismissal, it’s the question of what constitutes gross negligence. Obviously the judge believes the ex-D committed it yet they believe they were merely defending their client.

So I got the impression if B&R decide to take this to the Supreme Court that will be the issue they‘d ask for resolution on. But the question - would they want all the speculation and possible untruths (blatant lies?) contained in the two motions mentioned (Frank’s and dog kennel/prison) picked over with a fine tooth comb? JMO it’s very high risk, if they lose that would form a solid basis for a bar complaint. After yesterday’s hearing MS says there’s far less chatter from pro-defense folk as to what will happen next.

Just one more reason why the judge has the ex-D on a short string…. at the very beginning the judge stated she did not want this case to be tried in the court of public opinion. Yet the D appears to have went out of their way to do just that.

All my opinion and interpretation.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Here's the actual section that you are referencing:
View attachment 457427View attachment 457428

Gull publicly shaming them and stating she had already decided to disqualify them no matter what they state in the record would harm their defense of Allen. If she is allowing cameras in the court only as a method of shaming the defense then I don't see why they would at all want to walk into that situation believing they would actually get a chance to air their side without any ability to prepare, and call witnesses (like they planned but were not allowed to do at yesterday's hearing).

Perhaps if you are correct and they wanted to appear as 'rock stars' as you interpret their actions, that is what they would have chosen, but going the route they did seems to be more indicative of lawyers who are actually concerned with staying on the case to defend their client.

Bob Motta of Defense Diaries said on stream yesterday he is planning to request the audio recording from the chambers on Oct 19th as apparently is the public's right to request in IN, which would bring some clarity to this matter.

Publicly shaming is the dramatic, as always, way the D responds to everything. The Judge reading their Gross Misconduct allegations on the record would be fair if accurate. The Judge wasn't going to throw rotten tomatoes at them or anything. (hopefully)

If they have done nothing, they have nothing to fear and could answer back in Open Court and on the record.

JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

If it was recorded in chambers it is on the record. It's just not been released publically.

That they withdrew was also confirmed by R during open court yesterday, maybe he listened to the recording and now they’re all on the same page. This is one debate that can be taken off the list. lol!