IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #173

[sunshineray]

JG's second lawyer did bring up whether RA was even fit to choose his own council which shocked me. Both sides were throwing out anything and everything, IMO. I think it ended, in the eyes of the Supremes, on a we're going to kick this back to Gull, hold your ineffectual council hearing (if you think they are) that the defense averted by withdrawing and then go from there.
AJMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

One really good thing from all of this, from what I understand;

If RA has his lawyers reinstated after being informed that they have been deemed ineffective, he has NO right to appeal based on his counsel being in effective, correct?

If that's true, I say " Go ahead and bring in the clowns."
Give him what he wants!


JMO

 

[sunshineray]

One really good thing from all of this, from what I understand;

If RA has his lawyers reinstated after being informed that they have been deemed ineffective, he has NO right to appeal based on his counsel being in effective, correct?

If that's true, I say " Go ahead and bring in the clowns."
Give him what he wants!


JMO

That was a question brought up by a Supreme and yeah it sounded like the defense lawyer said the client (RA) would be signing something saying he couldn't appeal on the grounds if ineffective council...if he gets his old lawyers back, goes to trial with them and loses.

 

[steeltowngirl]

What is the status of the motion to transfer RA?

There is Hilton in Ft Wayne. Give him a room and armed guards until it’s figured out.

Only half kidding.

 

[photographer4]

They're going to reinstate, I think. But one justice just asked defense guy if the old defense wants to be reinstated as public defenders OR pro bono, LOL

That was an interesting question actually because the state could be seen as liable for his poor defense if they fund it. What a condundrum!

 

[steeltowngirl]

That was a question brought up by a Supreme and yeah it sounded like the defense lawyer said the client (RA) would be signing something saying he couldn't appeal on the grounds if ineffective council...if he gets his old lawyers back, goes to trial with them and loses.

Is that even legal? I thought setting a condition of waiver of a defendant’s future right to appeal was an unacceptable legal condition.

 

[photographer4]

What is the status of the motion to transfer RA?

There is Hilton in Ft Wayne. Give him a room and armed guards until it’s figured out.

Only half kidding.

I'd actually be alright with that idea!!

 

[Ravenmoon]

I can't believe I am saying this, but I now hope that Baldwin and Rozzi are reinstated and trial begins by May.

Let's do this. Let him have EVERYTHING he wants!


JMO

 

[sunshineray]

This is so frustrating.

The exD removed themselves.
They didn't want to have a hearing that day.
Why??
So instead, they will be reinstated.
Are they just praying that Judge Gull wont set another hearing and the controversy just dies?
Does exD want the judge removed to save face?
I hope that the trial DOES move forward quickly. It's best for everyone involved.


JMO

I think the if the old D gets reinstated there has to be a hearing on if they're gross negligence stands/stays on record right? So whole another circus with attorneys?

 

[sunshineray]

Is that even legal? I thought setting a condition of waiver of a defendant’s future right to appeal was an unacceptable legal condition.

Good point on that but like that one justice said, you can't have it both ways...what to do?

 

[photographer4]

@alcaprari23

Defense argues Allen could waive a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. That is his right, defense argues. But he says that Judge Gull's arguments don't even meet the criteria for ineffective assistance of counsel."The judge exceeded her jurisdiction and refused to meet Allen's wishes. There is more clarity than we see in records across the state as to what this client's wishes are. They are undisputed. And the Judge had a duty to respect what he wanted..."The justices commend both arguments and says they will issue a ruling as soon as possible. Court is adjourned.


12:04 PM · Jan 18, 2024

I liked his assertiveness in this section of his arguments! He was very firm that RA couldn't have been more clear on his wishes and cited each date when RA was clear. I hope RA DOES get his original counsel back! And... I hope that forces the matter to trial sooner than next October. JG in my view should NOT have fired the counsel without a hearing.

I also thought the the argument by the prosecution that RA's right to have the counsel of his choice was extremely limited was an interesting argument, but not compelling enough in my view to ensure that the original defense is not reinstated.

 

[Ravenmoon]

I think the if the old D gets reinstated there has to be a hearing on if they're gross negligence stands/stays on record right? So whole another circus with attorneys?

Well, it is all about them at this point.
I honestly want RA to get everything he wants at this point so that the families can leave this part of the story put behind them.

Can they have closure? Never. But, they will finally be able to mourn. Maybe people will stop threatening them and claiming that they were involved. Maybe the hostility between the public finally decreases.

I want the family to find their new normal.


JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

Good point on that but like that one justice said, you can't have it both ways...what to do?

He will have other appeals available, just not one that includes ineffective counsel.


JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I can't believe I am saying this, but I now hope that Baldwin and Rozzi are reinstated and trial begins by May.

Let's do this. Let him have EVERYTHING he wants!


JMO

But it's still on record that the old defense was grossly negligent. Does reinstatement by the Supremes wipe that off the record...and they start back as if nothing happened OR does the trial court have a hearing on the old D's negligence?

 

[sunshineray]

He will have other appeals available, just not one that includes ineffective counsel.


JMO

I'm just guessing...yes?

 

[Ravenmoon]

I liked his assertiveness in this section of his arguments! He was very firm that RA couldn't have been more clear on his wishes and cited each date when RA was clear. I hope RA DOES get his original counsel back! And... I hope that forces the matter to trial sooner than next October. JG in my view should NOT have fired the counsel without a hearing.

I also thought the the argument by the prosecution that RA's right to have the counsel of his choice was extremely limited was an interesting argument, but not compelling enough in my view to ensure that the original defense is not reinstated.

They withdrew.
Had they not they would have had a hearing that day.

JMO

 

[TL4S]

They withdrew.
Had they not they would have had a hearing that day.

JMO

In my listening, even one of the SCOIN judges said after reading the transcripts of the in-chambers hearing, that it didn't seem like the attorneys had much choice in withdrawing that day. JMO.

 

[Ravenmoon]

But it's still on record that the old defense was grossly negligent. Does reinstatement by the Supremes wipe that off the record...and they start back as if nothing happened OR does the trial court have a hearing on the old D's negligence?

I have no idea.
But, I am on board with them continuing and using the Odinism as their defense.
Let them make fools of themselves.

Judge Gull can't shame them anymore than they have shamed themselves.

LET THEM.


JMO

 

[steeltowngirl]

Good point on that but like that one justice said, you can't have it both ways...what to do?

Can a person who is presumed to be innocent waive a right to appeal a conviction prior to going to trial? It appears his right to appeal cannot be waived as a condition of a conviction or plea bargain.

Criminal Defendants' Waiver of the Right to Appeal -- An Unacceptable Condition of a Negotiated Sentence or Plea Bargain | Office of Justice Programs

www.ojp.gov

 

[LaurelTedytamer]

Hi,
It was fascinating watching the procedure on live stream. I was surprised how being a normal person with no legal knowledge I could understand the questions they asked and the answers.

Whatever the results the trial procedures will begin again as speedy as possible and this time let’s hope it follows the guidelines so justice for Abby and Libby can be found as well as RA getting a fair trial.