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

[Caylee Advocate]

According to the witnesses themselves in follow-up interviews they did not describe what Liggett reported. BB said the car she saw was a Comet. The jacket SC saw was tan not blue. BB’s sketch of who she saw on the bridge omitted at a press release was sketch #2; she contacted LE when they released sketch 1 bc she said it looked nothing like BG. BB said sketch #2 is who she saw and that she told LE that.

Hmm, and I wonder just how many 65' comets are in the area? I need to find that article where it showed 1 with 2 guys standing in front of it talking on camera.

 

[photographer4]

It's not on AB if his friend is a jerk, but it most definitely on AB to secure confidential trial material.

Which short of locking the conference room, he did do. What reason, if any did he have to suspect his friend might screw him in such epic fashion? Especially if that friend had been a consultant to the lawyer? None. That said, I would like to know - as a consultant, had MW signed an NDA? What reason was he a consultant in the first place?

Was MW a consultant on any other cases for AB?

 

[photographer4]

According to the law office website cited below:

“Possible Grounds for A Franks Hearing

A trial court is obligated to conduct a Franks hearing only if the defendant makes a preliminary showing that:
1) The affiant knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, included a false statement in the warrant affidavit; and,
2) that the allegedly false statement was necessary to a finding of probable cause.”

Anyone please correct me if I remember anything wrong or left anything out.

The grounds for the search warrant were:
-RA saying he was at the bridge during a specific timeline.
-RA’s car being in the parking lot within a certain timeline per eyewitnesses.
-Eyewitnesses seeing him on the bridge at a certain time.
-An unspent bullet casing found a handful of days later in the dirt.
(the video-without the timeline and BG proven as RA, this is secondary IMO; the Down the Hill video occurred around 2:13pm; BB would have seen the car approximately 2:15pm)

The FM argues (p. 23-25, p. 105-118):
-RA said he was gone by 1-1:30PM in his initial interview, and Liggett misstated him/or intentionally misstated him.
-Liggett lied about the eyewitness BB’s description of the car-BB did not say the car looked like RA’s car.
-Liggett lied about what the eyewitness on the bridge, BB, said she saw. Who looked nothing like RA, but younger and a different height/appearance.
-Liggett lied about the eyewitness who allegedly saw a man in a bloody blue jacket, SC. SC said she said she told him she saw a man in a tan and muddy jacket.
-There was no chain of custody for the unspent bullet which was found a month or 2? later.
-exculpatory evidence was withheld from the D until August 2023.

Sources:
(p. 23-25, p. 105-118)

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion.pdf

www.scribd.com

What is A Franks Hearing? | Search Warrant Justification

A law firm dedicated to criminal defense including Frank's Hearings in Southwest Michigan. Offices located in Kalamazoo & Berrien County.

www.hillslawoffice.com

Those are some GLARING issues highlighted by the FM regarding what the witness said about a man in a TAN (not blue / black) jacket which was MUDDY (not bloody??). GLARING. How the heck does that even happen?

 

[photographer4]

I think the State filing the new separate charges of RA committing the act of murder and kidnapping instead of the original Felony Murder charges clears that up.

MOO

I don't actually think it does. They put it out there at the time of the arrest that there may be others involved. The prosecution echoed that idea at the initial court proceeding on RA. Just because they have opted to change the charges doesn't remove the idea that anyone else could have / might have been there (in my view anyhow).

 

[photographer4]

New today. I wonder if this is Scremin and Lebrato.

01/24/2024

Motion to Withdraw Appearance Filed Motion to Withdraw Appearance Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 01/24/2024

I was wondering if anyone can direct me to where / how they find these summaries? Is there a link / website I could be checking myself going forward? Ty in advance!

 

[Emma Peel]

Those are some GLARING issues highlighted by the FM regarding what the witness said about a man in a TAN (not blue / black) jacket which was MUDDY (not bloody??). GLARING. How the heck does that even happen?

IIRC age of that witnesses' "muddy guy" also differs with other witnesses' age estimations. (Younger.)
Brought up in the PCA-related motion denied this week.

 

[Ravenmoon]

Those are some GLARING issues highlighted by the FM regarding what the witness said about a man in a TAN (not blue / black) jacket which was MUDDY (not bloody??). GLARING. How the heck does that even happen?

Red arrow points to tan hoodie under the blue jacket.

Sometimes people layer clothing.
Removing the outer layer is pretty simple.
In this case, removing the blue jacket because of the blood seems reasonable.

Muddy from crossing the creek seems reasonable also, doesn't it?

 

[photographer4]

According to the witnesses themselves in follow-up interviews they did not describe what Liggett reported. BB said the car she saw was a Comet. The jacket SC saw was tan not blue. BB’s sketch of who she saw on the bridge omitted at a press release was sketch #2; she contacted LE when they released sketch 1 bc she said it looked nothing like BG. BB said sketch #2 is who she saw and that she told LE that.

BB - is she the one who had noted that her father had a car just like the one she reported having seen?

 

[FrostedGlass]

I was wondering if anyone can direct me to where / how they find these summaries? Is there a link / website I could be checking myself going forward? Ty in advance!

Search by name or case number
08C01-2210-MR-000001

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

 

[mrjitty]

View attachment 477407


Red arrow points to tan hoodie under the blue jacket.

Sometimes people layer clothing.
Removing the outer layer is pretty simple.
In this case, removing the blue jacket because of the blood seems reasonable.

Muddy from crossing the creek seems reasonable also, doesn't it?

I’ll be so bummed if we don’t get a reasoned judgement that deals with all this.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I’ll be so bummed if we don’t get a reasoned judgement that deals with all this.

Judge Gull stated her reasons in her response to deny the Franks Motion Hearing and bullet evidence. I bet that is all that we'll be getting.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Judge Gull stated her reasons in her response to deny the Franks Motion Hearing and bullet evidence. I bet that is all that we'll be getting.

MOO

That isn’t a reasoned judgement.

 

[tlcya]

That isn’t a reasoned judgement.

it wasn't a reasoned motion JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I don't actually think it does. They put it out there at the time of the arrest that there may be others involved. The prosecution echoed that idea at the initial court proceeding on RA. Just because they have opted to change the charges doesn't remove the idea that anyone else could have / might have been there (in my view anyhow).

They filed those first Felony Murder charges upon his arrest when they even announced there may be another actor(s) involved. These last 4 charges are specifically that RA committed the Murder and committed Kidnapping of Abby and Libby.

This indicates to me that they have found new or further evidence that supports RA did commit the murders and kidnappings.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

View attachment 477407


Red arrow points to tan hoodie under the blue jacket.

Sometimes people layer clothing.
Removing the outer layer is pretty simple.
In this case, removing the blue jacket because of the blood seems reasonable.

Muddy from crossing the creek seems reasonable also, doesn't it?

To me this couldn't look anymore exactly like RA in height and body shape, especially the legs and how the jeans are super long due to his short legs as seen in other photos. I have studied this photo and other photos I've found online for hours, literally.

MOO

 

[Ravenmoon]

To me this couldn't look anymore exactly like RA in height and body shape, especially the legs and how the jeans are super long due to his short legs as seen in other photos. I have studied this photo and other photos I've found online for hours, literally.

MOO

I agree 100 percent.

 

[Emma Peel]

it wasn't a reasoned motion JMO

which motion?
I'm not sure I'm following ... are we talking about the motion regarding the PCA deficits and the conflict between a witness' statement and what was presented in the PCA as the witness's statement?

 

[girlhasnoname]

That isn’t a reasoned judgement.

The Court finds the Affidavit submitted in support of the issuance of the search warrant contained information that a reasonable belief existed that evidence of the murders would be found in the defendant's home and vehicles. The Court does not find that the Affidavit submitted false statements or that the Affiant omitted statements with reckless disregard, nor does the Court find that the Affiant intended to mislead the Judge by failing to present information.

As the Court has found the Affidavit for issuance of the search warrant was valid, the search itself was reasonable and legal under Indiana law and Fourth Amendment case law. Defendant's Motion to Suppress Fruits of Search of 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, IN (filed May 19, 2023) is also denied based upon all the pleadings, memorandums, and exhibits previously submitted in support of the request for a Franks hearing.

Defendant's Motion in Limine Regarding Ballistics (filed June 13, 2023) is reviewed and denied without hearing. The Court finds the evidence contained in Defendant's Exhibits A and B attached to the Motion is relevant and admissible.
The Court further finds the probative value of such evidence is not outweighed by its prejudicial impact, and that the evidence will not confuse or mislead the jury.

How much more is required for a reasoned judgement?

 

[photographer4]

IIRC age of that witnesses' "muddy guy" also differs with other witnesses' age estimations. (Younger.)
Brought up in the PCA-related motion denied this week.

Denied without a hearing and thus far, without benefit of a written explanation of the ruling.

 

[Emma Peel]

That isn’t a reasoned judgement.

Pretty sure Baldwin was advised in chambers that he should divine her reasoning.

"What's changed? "

JMHO