IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #174

[Salah11]

She was still making rulings on Nov 1. I wasn't even talking about the months she couldn't rule.

I totally agree with you that it's a mess.
IMO the Indiana Supreme Court decision seems to have boldened her.
IMO she's on the bench until if/when she decides to leave.
IMO she needs to go
IMO they need to get RA out of prison

Since when does a man accused of two counts of murder get released?

He is in the right place until trial as nobody wants a monster capable of killing two teenage girls living next door!

Moo

 

[FrostedGlass]

Since when does a man accused of two counts of murder get released?

He is in the right place until trial as nobody wants a monster capable of killing two teenage girls living next door!

Moo

I didn't say he should be released. I said they should get him out of prison.

In the US, we have rights. We don't imprison innocent people in the eyes of the law. We confine them in county jails until they go to trial. If found guilty, then they go to prison.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Since when does a man accused of two counts of murder get released?

He is in the right place until trial as nobody wants a monster capable of killing two teenage girls living next door!

Moo

Especially one that has made 5 confession on a recorded line, and also who has claimed self harm from the beginning?
Also, Murder is not a bondable offense in Indiana when the proof is evident or assumption is great:

2010 Indiana Code
TITLE 35. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
ARTICLE 33. PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
CHAPTER 8. BAIL AND BAIL PROCEDURE​

IC 35-33-8
Chapter 8. Bail and Bail Procedure

IC 35-33-8-1
"Bail bond" defined
Sec. 1. As used in this chapter, "bail bond" means a bond executed by a person who has been arrested for the commission of an offense, for the purpose of ensuring:
(1) the person's appearance at the appropriate legal proceeding;
(2) another person's physical safety; or
(3) the safety of the community.
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.2. Amended by P.L.221-1996, SEC.1.
IC 35-33-8-2
Murder; other offenses
Sec. 2. (a) Murder is not bailable when the proof is evident or the presumption strong. In all other cases, offenses are bailable.
(b) A person charged with murder has the burden of proof that he should be admitted to bail.
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.2.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I didn't say he should be released. I said they should get him out of prison.

In the US, we have rights. We don't imprison innocent people in the eyes of the law. We confine them in county jails until they go to trial. If found guilty, then they go to prison.

There are rare exceptions that Defendants are remanded to DOC to await trial.

JMO

 

[Salah11]

I didn't say he should be released. I said they should get him out of prison.

In the US, we have rights. We don't imprison innocent people in the eyes of the law. We confine them in county jails until they go to trial. If found guilty, then they go to prison.

Considering what he is charged with then things have to be adjusted accordingly. He has confessed multiple times to this crime as well.

He is a danger to society and is in the right place until trial.

 

[FrostedGlass]

There are rare exceptions that Defendants are remanded to DOC to await trial.

JMO

Obviously. I've even found three now. One I posted about has been in protective custody within the DOC for 4 years.
I wonder if he's getting the same treatment as RA.

For the record, I am adamantly opposed to keeping people in solitary confinement for months/years.

 

[mrjitty]

Obviously. I've even found three now. One I posted about has been in protective custody within the DOC for 4 years.
I wonder if he's getting the same treatment as RA.

For the record, I am adamantly opposed to keeping people in solitary confinement for months/years.

I am adamantly opposed to keeping people on remand for extended periods without at least a bail hearing and prelim.

 

[NoSpoonFeeding]

There are rare exceptions that Defendants are remanded to DOC to await trial.

JMO

A defendant "remanded to DOC" is not the same thing as being housed as an inmate serving a sentence. Our constitution requires that pretrial detainees are treated differently than convicted felons serving a sentence in a prison. There is nothing exceptional about RA, he doesn't have circumstances that set him apart from a long list of murderers presently in JAILS awaiting trial. Can you name any of the rare exceptions, exceptions that truly are the same circumstances as RA? For the life of me, I can't see how it isn't clear that RA has no business being in a prison and the court has no business taking any chances on this trial.

 

[Justice101]

Here are the main reasons for not allowing bail of the accused:

• Flight Risk.
• Charged with a Particularly Violent Crime.
• Charged with a Terrorism-Related Offense.
• Charged with a Crime Punishable by Death or Life Imprisonment.
• Certain Drug-Related Charges. Kingpin.
• Multiple Prior Convictions.
• Violation of Probation or Parole.
• Risk of Obstruction of Justice.

 

[EllaMinnowP]

Especially one that has made 5 confession on a recorded line, and also who has claimed self harm from the beginning?

Respectfully snipped and bolded by me.

Did RA threaten self-harm? I could have missed it, or forgotten it.

Thanks.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Obviously. I've even found three now. One I posted about has been in protective custody within the DOC for 4 years.
I wonder if he's getting the same treatment as RA.

For the record, I am adamantly opposed to keeping people in solitary confinement for months/years.

I am also opposed to keeping an innocent person in Solitary Confinement, but RA is a Defendant, he has been charged with these murders. He is not some innocent person LE just scooped up out of nowhere and charged without some evidence of his possible guilt.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Motta makes an interesting point in his latest podcast with Shay Hughes

He wouldn't have been surprised if, in a prelim style hearing, Gull had denied a full evidentiary hearing on the Franks, because if you take out the potentially dubious statements from Ligget, there is still enough there, so the defence can't win, even if they prove what they allege. But to do it without even a prelim hearing on it, in this context is odd. He doesn't practice in Indiana though.

Hughes made a good followup point. If Allen's attorneys made incorrect claims - Gull doesn't say this. She just gave this tiny order.

As you all know, I am not fan of the Franks, and think it was a huge risk to include all that Odinist stuff when they could have played with a straight bat, but it does seem bizarre to dismiss all of it with no hearing and no reasoning.

Surely there are going to be full reasons given?

Or not? Like if not, that doesn't sit well with me.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I am adamantly opposed to keeping people on remand for extended periods without at least a bail hearing and prelim.

His bail hearing was supposed to be part of that June hearing along with his transfer order. Then came the sticky wicket of the 5 confessions being introduced into evidence (which the D had to acknowledge was true).

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

A defendant "remanded to DOC" is not the same thing as being housed as an inmate serving a sentence. Our constitution requires that pretrial detainees are treated differently than convicted felons serving a sentence in a prison. There is nothing exceptional about RA, he doesn't have circumstances that set him apart from a long list of murderers presently in JAILS awaiting trial. Can you name any of the rare exceptions, exceptions that truly are the same circumstances as RA? For the life of me, I can't see how it isn't clear that RA has no business being in a prison and the court has no business taking any chances on this trial.

I would normally agree, but due to the gag order we are not privy to the facts of why RA is being held in DOC vs Jail. There's been more than one transfer Motion filed, which have been denied. I believe, besides RA's confessions of guilt, there is a good reason he is being held in prison rather than a jail.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Respectfully snipped and bolded by me.

Did RA threaten self-harm? I could have missed it, or forgotten it.

Thanks.

<snipped & BBM>
Allen’s defense said in an April filing requesting he be moved to another facility that his living conditions at the prison were akin to those of a “prisoner of war,” including a photo — taken on April 4, the day after his last phone call to his wife — in which he appears thin, frail and unwashed. Prosecutors acknowledged that Allen had lost weight, but said his BMI, or body mass index, was still “on target” for his age. They described him as being “entombed” in a cold 6-by-10-foot cell like a dog kennel, where he slept on a pad on the concrete floor, and said he was forced to wear soiled and ripped clothes, could only take one or two showers a week, and had limited recreation time.

In response, prosecutors called the defense’s filing “colorful and dramatic” and included an affidavit from the prison warden saying that Allen’s cell is the “standard size” of 8-by-12, that he has a mattress on a bedframe attached to the floor for protection since “he has made suicidal statements,” has access to clean clothes and is allowed to shower three times a week, and has recreation time five days a week.

Shocking Details Of Delphi Murders And Suspect’s Health Revealed In Documents

 

[mrjitty]

His bail hearing was supposed to be part of that June hearing along with his transfer order. Then came the sticky wicket of the 5 confessions being introduced into evidence (which the D had to acknowledge was true).

MOO

I agree that is what happened, but I prefer a system where there is a prelim and bail considered - then at least you have judicial oversight that there is a case to answer.

 

[mrjitty]

Motta makes another interesting point. For all we know, SCOINs judgement may simply say that attorneys can only be removed with a hearing and clarify the standard. So will Gull now order a DQ hearing?

That would be insane.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Motta makes another interesting point. For all we know, SCOINs judgement may simply say that attorneys can only be removed with a hearing and clarify the standard. So will Gull now order a DQ hearing?

That would be insane.

This entire case is insane, truly. From day one it's been one bizarre thing after another.

 

[steeltowngirl]

Motta makes another interesting point. For all we know, SCOINs judgement may simply say that attorneys can only be removed with a hearing and clarify the standard. So will Gull now order a DQ hearing?

That would be insane.

I don’t see FG attempting to disqualify attorneys that were just reinstated by SCOIN. She would recuse before she would try that.

jmo

 

[girlhasnoname]

I knew when the ruling against the FM was denied people would be upset. I was upset when the exD were reinstated, but I took it in stride and continued to post respectfully of others opinions. I was hoping we could do the same here.

#Justic4Abby&Libby

MOO