Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #183

[justtrish]

Perhaps we're being punked about pings.

Perhaps these were events internally generated that awakened the phone. Incoming calls/texts. Scheduled updates.

A stretch to describe that as the phone being somehow in transit. Phone may have had its reasons for trying to ping off one tower or another.

The D is trying to delay the time of death to a point in time where RA has a locked alibi

But I suspect the actual data will show that, at a point that afternoon, Libby's phone didn't move but did continue communicating with towers, none of which was generated by Libby herself. And the cessation of human driven contact on her phone indicates TOD, close to 2:13 and nowhere near 5 pm on 2/13 or 4 am on 2/14.

Think about what happens to one's phone when left on a charger overnight. It doesn't move but apps are updated. Emails and messages are received. Busy phone, no one in possession of it.

It's only the Defense trying to manipulate the timeline.

JMO

Thank you!

I am not surprised at all (the D and their ways) and when released in this way, there is no expert on the stand to explain any of it and dispute what they write. So while this isn't lying, it is interpreting data however they want to that best suites their client. Now if this was in a court room with a phone expert on the stand I'd imagine it would be explained quickly and there would be no discussion about it.

Her phone was under her body. I'm sure that didn't help the signal either and as you said pinging it or someone calling her or texting her is not proof that her phone moved.

Trial day can't come soon enough so we can just discuss FACTS presented at trial.

 

[layer]

That's a good point you both made that those could have been updates, text, calls etc causing the phone to ping. I know if I was a parent or friend I would be texting/calling and hoping.

Some things you type through tears. Just thinking about the loved ones looking for them, worrying about them, trying to reach them.

Not to mention the phone is found inside a shoe underneath Abby. I really feel it was put there on purpose. Could one of them stuck the phone in their shoe to hide it? I don't think so but this is troubling.

I literally learn something new every day, here. Libby's phone was found inside a shoe, under Abby, who was dressed in Libby's clothing?
Huh
Do we know who's shoe it was?

 

[TTF14]

what if the bridge video was erased and recovered on her cloud? That would be great reason.

But then why wouldn't they just keep the phone powered off and chuck it in a river? Why leave it with the body? That makes no sense. Loading evidence on the phone that directs away from the actual killer makes way more sense in that scenario (if the killers were messing with the phone all night).

IMO MOO

 

[vinayd]

JG Letter to Counsel 4-30

 

[layer]

what if the bridge video was erased and recovered on her cloud?

Get out of my head!!!!!
I have wondered about that forever.

 

[Megnut]

In all the trials I've followed, the purpose of the ping is to locate the phone at its last location, not 44 points prior to that.

The last ping was probably that 4:33 am ping because the battery died.

The 44 events prior to that were probably incoming calls and texts from worried friends and family.

The Defense wanted people to do exactly what some did. Decide the State was withholding discovery including data that could move the needle on time of death.

This information does not do that!!!

It's merely a log of passive reception until the battery died.

Nice try, Defense.

JMO

 

[vinayd]

Some things you type through tears. Just thinking about the loved ones looking for them, worrying about them, trying to reach them.

I literally learn something new every day, here. Libby's phone was found inside a shoe, under Abby, who was dressed in Libby's clothing?
Huh
Do we know who's shoe it was?

It's in the Franks the crime scene starts at page 28 but take it with grains of salt and a little pepto for all the description.
FRANKS 1.0

 

[TTF14]

JG Letter to Counsel 4-30

Well, that answers my question about what happens if they run out of time. Do we think there will be a further "order" giving them each specific time limits? It would not be fair if Nick took 12 days and left the defense with 3 (I know that math isn't mathing but you get my point).

I'm glad to see court will go until 6 if needed and on Saturdays.

 

[justtrish]

I wonder if there were any fingerprints on Libby's phone. Even her own. I doubt it.

Hypothetically speaking, if the girls were not there all night, but were brought back in the wee hours of the morning, and the phone was intentionally left by the killers, what would be the purpose in powering the phone on (hence the ping) instead of just leaving it powered off? Thinking as a criminal I mean...why would they do that?

IMO MOO

I don't think it makes any sense to remove 2 girls from the woods to go to another location and then bring them back to the location where there is a search going on and risk being seen/caught. The family stayed out there that night looking. LE called it off really late from what I remember, but it was said that family/friends continued to look. If the killer lived in Delphi or had the girls in Delphi that night, then that person would know about the massive search efforts going on at the trail immediately. WHY would a killer then bring them back to that same area they know is saturated with LE and the community searching? Then bring the phone back too? It just doesn't make any sense for even the dumbest criminal to walk back into the fire to dispose of the victims. What makes the most sense is the victims were walked to the spot in the woods where they were killed and left, with the phone. The killer exits the area and does not return back for any reason because the area is saturated with people looking for the girls.

 

[WildHuncher]

JG Letter to Counsel 4-30

Another bad look. JG openly states the trial has a hard time limit and that P will be given an unknown percentage of that limit, apparently all the P wants.

Dear JG, State of Indiana, and prosecutors:

Stop playing the heavy!!

 

[TTF14]

In all the trials I've followed, the purpose of the ping is to locate the phone at its last location, not 44 points prior to that.

The last ping was probably that 4:33 am ping because the battery died.

The 44 events prior to that were probably incoming calls and texts from worried friends and family.

The Defense wanted people to do exactly what some did. Decide the State was withholding discovery including data that could move the needle on time of death.

This information does not do that!!!

It's merely a log of passive reception until the battery died.

Nice try, Defense.

JMO

But we really don't know (unless we have an expert here) if a battery dying makes a phone "ping."

I usually gloss over all the technical phone ping stuff in trials I watch because it's so very boring to me, but we could learn more about this by watching past trials where phone evidence was part of the trial.

IMO MOO

 

[TTF14]

I don't think it makes any sense to remove 2 girls from the woods to go to another location and then bring them back to the location where there is a search going on and risk being seen/caught. The family stayed out there that night looking. LE called it off really late from what I remember, but it was said that family/friends continued to look. If the killer lived in Delphi or had the girls in Delphi that night, then that person would know about the massive search efforts going on at the trail immediately. WHY would a killer then bring them back to that same area they know is saturated with LE and the community searching? Then bring the phone back too? It just doesn't make any sense for even the dumbest criminal to walk back into the fire to dispose of the victims. What makes the most sense is the victims were walked to the spot in the woods where they were killed and left, with the phone. The killer exits the area and does not return back for any reason because the area is saturated with people looking for the girls.

What if, hypothetically speaking, searchers were turned away from searching in a particular area by people who were out there also "searching?"

IMO MOO Theory

 

[Ravenmoon]

IMO, there is more on LGs phone than we think. This article was released 6 months after the murders:

Police: Delphi murder victims spoke of man behind them in audio played for family

State police say more audio from Libby German's cell phone was played for the victims' families, including a mention of a man they noticed behind them.

Police say the girls mostly talk about "stuff girls talk about" in the recording, but they also mention the man. The only audio that has been released to the public from the phone is that of a man's voice ordering German and her friend, Abby Williams, "down the hill."

 

[layer]

But then why wouldn't they just keep the phone powered off and chuck it in a river? Why leave it with the body? That makes no sense. Loading evidence on the phone that directs away from the actual killer makes way more sense in that scenario (if the killers were messing with the phone all night).

The only way I can make sense of the killer knowing of the phone and even placing it there is if it actually was a frame job. Seems kind of unlikely, but nothing is rational about this case. Perhaps Libby stuck the phone up into the toe of the shoe while taking her shoes off, and the killer just never saw it. Maybe he had them take off their shoes & socks in order to cross the creek without them getting wet. I really wonder which girl's shoe it was, and if it was wet.

 

[justtrish]

Another bad look. JG openly states the trial has a hard time limit and that P will be given an unknown percentage of that limit, apparently all the P wants.

Dear JG, State of Indiana, and prosecutors:

Stop playing the heavy!!

I think this letter is good and firm. It isn't preventing the defense from presenting their case, it's giving them a warning that delays with witnesses won't be tolerated. Game playing won't be tolerated. This jury is sequestered and this trial has to have a limit. The D said they need a few weeks to present their case. She is letting them know that their witnesses need to be ready, no delays due to scheduling. They requested this speedy trial so any timing issues they might have could now be their own fault. If they want to claim a third party is involved they need to present that before with proof or it isn't going to fly. So what is going to take them many weeks to present?

I think it's a clear message that they wanted this speedy trial, they knew the amount of time allowed and there have been no objections by any attorney on the time being too short for them to present their case. She even notes that the original trial for Jan 2024 had a similar time allotted and no objections. If there was an issue they could have brought that up before now.

 

[Salah11]

I wonder if Libby or Abby put the phone in the shoe as one laid there dying.

Let’s not forget Libby had the foresight to record RA so she would of know the phone was important.

Why would RA leave the phone behind if he knew what was on it and placing it in the shoe would be weird imo.

 

[AugustWest]

The only way I can make sense of the killer knowing of the phone and even placing it there is if it actually was a frame job. Seems kind of unlikely, but nothing is rational about this case. Perhaps Libby stuck the phone up into the toe of the shoe while taking her shoes off, and the killer just never saw it. Maybe he had them take off their shoes & socks in order to cross the creek without them getting wet. I really wonder which girl's shoe it was, and if it was wet.

Under a shoe, not within, according to Franks 1.

 

[layer]

It's in the Franks the crime scene starts at page 28 but take it with grains of salt and a little pepto for all the description.
FRANKS 1.0

Thanks!
So it was Libby's shoe. Ah, but that says under the shoe, not inside. Maybe it fell out.
Gah

 

[Megnut]

But we really don't know (unless we have an expert here) if a battery dying makes a phone "ping."

I usually gloss over all the technical phone ping stuff in trials I watch because it's so very boring to me, but we could learn more about this by watching past trials where phone evidence was part of the trial.

IMO MOO

I'm no phone expert but I know this: a battery dying doesn't cause a phone to ping.

Phones are constantly communicating with towers. All those apps.

The point of the ping is to find where a phone was LAST at.

In the case of a dead battery, it's the ping right before it died. It would have continued to ping for as long as it had juice!

IMO the Defense is exaggerating the significance of these pings, implying movement and agency (that someone was actively interacting with the phone).

IMO there will be CAST data at trial, geolocation or somesuch showing that the phone didn't move, that no human interfaced with it and that changes to the phone occurred in tandem with verifiable activity on other phones. Sent messages and outgoing calls corresponding to unread messages and unanswered phone calls.

Her phone may have bounced off towers because of the nature of the activity. Verizon and AT&T utilize their own towers. A lot of technical stuff I follow better when experts explain it!

If this doesn't get shut down outside of the trial, it'll be exposed post haste within it.

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

View attachment 500510

It's in the Franks the crime scene starts at page 28 but take it with grains of salt and a little pepto for all the description.
FRANKS 1.0

Everything in any of the Franks motions I consider speculation or information highly twisted to forward their narrative.
That’s my opinion after all these months. The defense has earned my distain.