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

[tlcya]

Prosecutor McLeland said he was 'at a loss,' when he was asked by the judge for his response. He shared with the court that he was concerned about Allen getting a fair trial.

According to the news outlet, McLeland alleged that Baldwin and Rozzi not only made negligent statements but they 'told lies.'

McLeland told the court that the two attorneys were trying to have 'the trial in the public eye.'

During the hearing, Judge Gull turned to the accused telling Allen, 'I cannot and will not allow these attorneys to represent you.'

She disqualified Baldwin and Rozzi from representing Allen, even pro bono. She also ordered both lawyers to hand over the discovery to the the newly appointed defense team by the end of the week.
[snip]
Allen's new defense attorneys have asked the Indiana State Supreme Court to reinstate important documents from the original defense team that the judge ordered to be removed from the record, the news outlet reported.
Delphi murder trial delayed after crime scene pictures leaked

 

[FrostedGlass]

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

Generally better. His color had improved, he had gained some weight back, he seemed more with it (or alert). Sounds like he had been or is being medicated. IMO

Maybe the prison officials didn't like all the negative comments about how he looked the last time he came to court?

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Just jumping of your post.

I have a lot of posts to read yet, but was curious if I missed something. Do we know for certain there was gross negligence?

Andrew Baldwin and Bradley Rozzi . Are there any confirmed facts on how these 'leaks' were obtained? Possibly the judge has details we do not have. I can understand if the evidence was contained in a room and an outside person was allowed in the room there would be a cause for negligence. On the other hand if a person illegally entered an evidence room and took pictures, wouldn't we need more details?

It just feels wrong in so many ways that this is dragging out. Two young girls were murdered, let's move for quick justice for these girls. If there was negligence state it and charge the offenders.

Per AB’s own statement a friend/former colleague had access to the evidence in a conference room. He was snookered- not robbed.

 

[MistyWaters]

Prosecutor McLeland said he was 'at a loss,' when he was asked by the judge for his response. He shared with the court that he was concerned about Allen getting a fair trial.

According to the news outlet, McLeland alleged that Baldwin and Rozzi not only made negligent statements but they 'told lies.'

McLeland told the court that the two attorneys were trying to have 'the trial in the public eye.'

During the hearing, Judge Gull turned to the accused telling Allen, 'I cannot and will not allow these attorneys to represent you.'

She disqualified Baldwin and Rozzi from representing Allen, even pro bono. She also ordered both lawyers to hand over the discovery to the the newly appointed defense team by the end of the week.
[snip]
Allen's new defense attorneys have asked the Indiana State Supreme Court to reinstate important documents from the original defense team that the judge ordered to be removed from the record, the news outlet reported.
Delphi murder trial delayed after crime scene pictures leaked

Just to clarify, according to MS’s account McLeland responded he was ‘at a loss’ after the judge looked at him following her query to B&R “what has changed in the past 12 days?”.

It was the judge who asked the ex-D when they planned to return discovery and B responded by the end of the week. I got the feeling they appeared deflated compared to the beginning of the hearing when they barged through the courtroom door and sat at the defense table.

JMO

 

[Cyber sleuth]

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

So much more. If we ever see that name and all the names involved in the leak I think the puzzle will come together.
Also I meant to put initials RS as the scapegoat for the leak. I edited to correct.

 

[al66pine]

Pro Bono Def. Atty's..... Eating "All the Costs"

Original defense team are attorneys in private practice. In short-staffed PD offices or in very small counties where the PD office may be small, private attorneys are pulled from a list to fill the void. B&W were pulled to rep RA, but this never made them public defenders. It only set them up to be paid as PDs for his case at a rate much lower than what they would likely receive if privately retained. Their appearance filings last night to continue on as pro bono counsel "in the event they are not reinstated as his PDs" would have resulted in them doing this work for free and in eating all of the costs associated with the representation...

snipped for focus @Jurisprudence
Thanks for your many informative posts on threads for Abby & Libby and on Four U of ID. Students Murdered/Kohberger arrested (and maybe other cases I don't follow).

From ^ post:
"... in the event they are not reinstated as his PDs would have resulted in them doing this work for free and in eating all of the costs associated with the representation..."

Atty's rep'ing crim def's pro bono are not compensated for their time, or paralegals' time, or other support staff time) which would customarily be billable hours in private practice.

As a gen point of info, not specific to this case, asking a Q re out of pocket expenses, such as expert witnesses fees, filing fees, travel, etc.

IIUC out of pocket expenses for def't's crim case MAY be paid by the state (or if initially paid by the law firm may be reimbursed by the state) on motion by the atty's working pro bono.
I recall reading a statute or court rule (in another st., not in IN) authorizing st. payment for these kinds of O/P expenses.

Again, that's IIUC and not saying I do. TiA.

 

[tlcya]

Just to clarify, according to MS’s account McLeland responded he was ‘at a loss’ after the judge looked at him following her query to B&R “what has changed in the past 12 days?”.

I just listened to the MS podcast and heard that. I simply linked an article. I wasn't there and so can't say whose account is more accurate than another's.

 

[MistyWaters]

Generally better. His color had improved, he had gained some weight back, he seemed more with it (or alert). Sounds like he had been or is being medicated. IMO

Maybe the prison officials didn't like all the negative comments about how he looked the last time he came to court?

Or maybe he refused to comply with medical recommendations so he could look as down and out as the D described to support their motion? They wouldn’t want him springing into the courtroom after that, appearance is everything.

JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

I just listened to the MS podcast and heard that. I simply linked an article. I wasn't there and so can't say whose account is more accurate than another's.

No problem, I noticed there’s varying accounts by the media.

 

[EllaMinnowP]

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.

I see that I’m a little late in saying this, but welcome to Websleuths!

 

[Emma Peel]

Or maybe he refused to comply with medical recommendations so he could look as down and out as the D described to support their motion? They wouldn’t want him springing into the courtroom after that, appearance is everything.

JMO

FWIW - I get a chuckle out of the various attempts to attribute a Ted Bundy level of evil genius to this defendant. Per the state's PCA/charging docs etc ... RA essentially turned himself in to LE within 24 hours of the murders.

so, not a genius.
just a guy dealing (poorly) with massive stress

JMO

 

[iamshadow21]

FWIW - I get a chuckle out of the various attempts to attribute a Ted Bundy level of evil genius to this defendant. Per the state's PCA/charging docs etc ... RA essentially turned himself in to LE within 24 hours of the murders.

so, not a genius.
just a guy dealing (poorly) with massive stress

JMO

I don't think there's much in his appearance. I think he just got bored of eating paper. I mean, I know food in prison is bad, but it's got to be better than A4 Reflex.

MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

So much more. If we ever see that name and all the names involved in the leak I think the puzzle will come together.
Also I meant to put initials RS as the scapegoat for the leak. I edited to correct.

I would bet the ex-D hope the details behind the leak never see the light of day, could be another reason they’ll just disappear silently into the background now. If MW isn’t charged at some point in the future or sued by AB, then questions should be asked.

It bad enough for a trusted friend, being given access to discovery material. So trusted that the trusted friend is not even asked to sign a confidentiality agreement, who then snookered B but even worse that he framed someone else for the leak, aside from involving R who later died by suicide when that diabolical plan didn’t work and they were found out.

Trusted friend indeed….birds of a feather. I agree, I don’t think the public knows the full story. JMO

 

[Cyber sleuth]

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.

Yes it’s interesting that it was presented one way by defense immediately after the chambers meeting. Now with proof, those grandstanding allegations are squashed.
Again how many passes of absolute false statements are allowed by someone with a legal requirement to be ethical before you distrust them completely.

 

[Ward Thisperer]

I see that I’m a little late in saying this, but welcome to Websleuths!

Thank you!

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I would bet the ex-D hope the details behind the leak never see the light of day, could be another reason they’ll just disappear silently into the background now. If MW isn’t charged at some point in the future or sued by AB, then questions should be asked.

It bad enough for a trusted friend, being given access to discovery material. So trusted that the trusted friend is not even asked to sign a confidentiality agreement, who then snookered B but even worse that he framed someone else for the leak, aside from involving R who later died by suicide when that diabolical plan didn’t work and they were found out.

Trusted friend indeed….birds of a feather. I agree, I don’t think the public knows the full story. JMO

Also interesting that MW was interviewed by MS in March ( or aired in March) and he had no involvement on the case yet somehow between March and August (leak began) he became involved. Which makes believe his collaboration was requested after RA confessed ( April 3).

 

[MistyWaters]

Also interesting that MW was interviewed by MS in March ( or aired in March) and he had no involvement on the case yet somehow between March and August (leak began) he became involved. Which makes believe his collaboration was requested after RA confessed ( April 3).

Good point. It’s also interesting how quickly the tables turned from the leak to negative focus on the Judge. I’d have to give it to the ex-D, they pulled off a great example of excellent crisis management.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Prosecutor McLeland said he was 'at a loss,' when he was asked by the judge for his response. He shared with the court that he was concerned about Allen getting a fair trial.

According to the news outlet, McLeland alleged that Baldwin and Rozzi not only made negligent statements but they 'told lies.'

McLeland told the court that the two attorneys were trying to have 'the trial in the public eye.'

During the hearing, Judge Gull turned to the accused telling Allen, 'I cannot and will not allow these attorneys to represent you.'

She disqualified Baldwin and Rozzi from representing Allen, even pro bono. She also ordered both lawyers to hand over the discovery to the the newly appointed defense team by the end of the week.
[snip]
Allen's new defense attorneys have asked the Indiana State Supreme Court to reinstate important documents from the original defense team that the judge ordered to be removed from the record, the news outlet reported.
Delphi murder trial delayed after crime scene pictures leaked

They keep reporting wrong information.

"Allen's new defense attorneys have asked the Indiana State Supreme Court to reinstate important documents from the original defense team that the judge ordered to be removed from the record, the news outlet reported."

An initial outlet referred to those attorneys as RA's attorneys and every other outlet seems to be picking it up on the wire and repeating it as gospel without checking it. The attorneys who filed the writ to the Indiana Supreme Court do not represent RA and this is patently clear from the face of the document itself. They don't even need to be attorneys to see this yet they keep repeating it. What else are they reporting wrong? I don't understand. It certainly shakes confidence in the press.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

Pro Bono Def. Atty's..... Eating "All the Costs"


snipped for focus @Jurisprudence
Thanks for your many informative posts on threads for Abby & Libby and on Four U of ID. Students Murdered/Kohberger arrested (and maybe other cases I don't follow).

From ^ post:
"... in the event they are not reinstated as his PDs would have resulted in them doing this work for free and in eating all of the costs associated with the representation..."

Atty's rep'ing crim def's pro bono are not compensated for their time, or paralegals' time, or other support staff time) which would customarily be billable hours in private practice.

As a gen point of info, not specific to this case, asking a Q re out of pocket expenses, such as expert witnesses fees, filing fees, travel, etc.

IIUC out of pocket expenses for def't's crim case MAY be paid by the state (or if initially paid by the law firm may be reimbursed by the state) on motion by the atty's working pro bono.
I recall reading a statute or court rule (in another st., not in IN) authorizing st. payment for these kinds of O/P expenses.

Again, that's IIUC and not saying I do. TiA.

I'm not sure if they would have been able to make an application to recoup court costs and filing fees or both of those plus expert witness and investigator fees. That certainly seems like it would be the proper and just thing to do. I'm not sure what Indiana law says about this. In the event they were not able to at least recoup those costs and fees they would have been forced to write them off. So they would potentially be in a very deep financial hole. All of these things when taken together lead me to believe that they must truly believe in his innocence, or at least in the fact that the investigation was not followed through to completion. If you think about how huge this trial is, doing this pro bono and taking up so much of their time would have surely impacted their respective law practices in a negative way. They would have to cease retaining new clients in order to work for RA for free. There are many things that have occurred in the past month which now give me great pause with the way this case has been handled. Too much does not add up. I'm not saying he is guilty or innocent. We don't know because we haven't seen all of the evidence. But I am saying that for all involved, including the public at large, we want the right person to be held accountable.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

That is exactly what I think she did today - and ya know what? If he cannot access a speedy trial (which he clearly cannot based on her moving the trial a year out now), then he should be acquitted. How many innocent members here would be fully ok with sitting in jail another year without trial because a cop thought you did it??

Did he ever formally waive his right to a speedy trial?