Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #158

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder how they came up with kidnapping and not simply a sexual act (since their clothes were off). How in the world would someone (RMA) think that he could simply walk the girls out of there after (likely) sexually assaulting them DTH? He had to know the chances of them being seen would be huge since he ran into others earlier. I can't wrap my head around that.

1669761640557.png
1669761655319.png
 
I asked this in the last thread but never got an answer so reposting here as I'd really like one if one of you have the answer. :)

I was wondering how they come up with numbering victims. Maybe the one closest to where they are is #1? Can anyone explain this, please? TIA!!
Just a guess, alphabetically. Even this thread has always been “Abby & Libby”
 
Well there we have it. A whole lot of what we have seen over the past several years strongly hinted at incompetence from law enforcement, but reading this document there is very little doubt now.

And yes, the only logical reason I can see for sealing the document was self preservation and the opportunity to have their triumphant press conference without having to face the blindingly obvious question of how it took them so long to reach this point. Amateur hour.

Would love to know what he victims' families are thinking of their law enforcement right now.
Years ago DC said, the public would wonder and be very surprised about the immense stuff, police had collected and investigated (other wording). I don't notice it yet.
 
It’s called the fog of war (an enormous case). Things that look so easy to you from the comfort of your couch are not so simple with twenty phones ringing, not enough help to handle the cascade of leads, and meetings every two hours.

And there was 70,000 tips raining down throughout that time. On over 5 years that averages about 250 tips a week to look into and I’m betting few if any pertained to RA as he had no SM presence.
 
I wonder how they came up with kidnapping and not simply a sexual act (since their clothes were off). How in the world would someone (RMA) think that he could simply walk the girls out of there after (likely) sexually assaulting them DTH? He had to know the chances of them being seen would be huge since he ran into others earlier. I can't wrap my head around that.

View attachment 383587
View attachment 383588

I guess because they have kidnapping on video, it makes the intent component an easy layup.

The gun + command, and then physical evidence of the killings, give them the whole deal.

Just the identity question.
 
I really can't believe they had enough evidence to arrest him within days of the murder, and didn't -- he was seen and remarked upon by so many people, consistent descriptions of his clothes, vehicle, and location, AND he was placed at the bridge on the day of the crime ... no wonder they didn't want to release it.
 
Now that we know what we know, I have to wonder if his wife did and asked him “is that you in the video?” he could have said “yes, I told the police I was there on the bridge that day”. Why would she question it? He did tell the police he was there that day wearing that outfit.
But…..at no point did LE acknowledge that they’ve identified the man in the video or have spoken to him. They continued to ask for the public’s help in identifying who the man was. So that tells me he likely did not tell his wife “hey that’s me in the video.”
 
Can you imagine the person that was “fresh eyes” and on page one of the file he/she sees Richard Allen’s statement? I wonder how long after seeing that before he/she realized RA worked across the street and went to take a gander at him. He/she was probably so confused about the entire case.
 
Thank you! Though something is still missing. Page 8.

The actual document titled Probable Cause Affidavit has numbering in lower left-hand corner that reads 1 of 8, 2 of 8, etc. The numbered pages stop at 7 of 8.

Some news places have the “8th” page of the PCA.
You can see that here (it’s a blank signature page) DocumentCloud

Weirdly, when I got the PCA from the clerk today via email and inquired about page 8 this was the response. So I’m a bit confused (I blocked out my name)
 

Attachments

  • D67F927E-1397-4B00-A806-96F596D01356.jpeg
    D67F927E-1397-4B00-A806-96F596D01356.jpeg
    79.2 KB · Views: 169
I guess because they have kidnapping on video, it makes the intent component an easy layup.

The gun + command, and then physical evidence of the killings, give them the whole deal.

Just the identity question.
Oh, I see. I was thinking of kidnapping like taking them somewhere. Well, he did take them somewhere (DTH) but I meant somewhere else. So simply forcing them DTH by showing a gun is considered kidnapping then. I guess. :confused:
 
But…..at no point did LE acknowledge that they’ve identified the man in the video or have spoken to him. They continued to ask for the public’s help in identifying who the man was. So that tells me he likely did not tell his wife “hey that’s me in the video.”
I know. I’m really confused about how/why she didn’t recognize him. I was just trying to come up with a theory. I guess we don’t know that she knew in 2017 that he’d told police he was on the bridge. So maybe he lied to his wife about where he was that day but told the police the truth.
 
11/29/22
We GO LIVE AT 8 PM EASTERN.
The Richard Allen/Delphi Probable Cause Affidavit has been releases. That's why tonight is a great night to welcome back our good friend former Jodi Arias attorney Kirk Nurmi.
 
Oh, I see. I was thinking of kidnapping like taking them somewhere. Well, he did take them somewhere (DTH) but I meant somewhere else. So simply forcing them DTH by showing a gun is considered kidnapping then. I guess. :confused:
Answering myself...

Kidnapping occurs when a person, without lawful authority, physically moves another person without that other person's consent, with the intent to use the abduction in connection with some other nefarious objective.

 
How does an unspent round have extraction marks on it? Guess I don't understand what 'unspent' means.
"Investigators believe Richard Allen was not seen on the trail after 2:13p.m. because he was in the
woods with Victim and Victim 2. An unspent .40 caliber round between the bodies of Victim 1 and
Victim 2, was forensically determined to have been cycled through Richard Allen's Sig Sauer Model P226."

It's nearly 2023. The fact we are almost 6 years on is beyond the pale. I feel sick for these families who have suffered through this. Cue Benny Hill theme.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
4,222
Total visitors
4,425

Forum statistics

Threads
592,645
Messages
17,972,350
Members
228,850
Latest member
Dena24
Back
Top