Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #159

[TL4S]

Assuming RA is the killer...

How does one go from point A: having no criminal record, owning the same gun and living in the same community for over a decade, and walking the same trail system on a regular basis, to point B: parking at the trail, walking with a mission to the bridge, waiting around the bridge for around 10 minutes before following two girls across the south half of the bridge to kidnap and murder them?

If something had simply triggered him to kill at random that day, why those girls? The witness who saw him on the bridge, only 50 feet away...why not her? He crossed the entire bridge in less than 5 minutes (somewhere between 2:07 and 2:13), so why didn't he cross 50 feet and force that lady into the woods at gunpoint when nobody else was around, not even the girls?

IMO, RA might have gone from point A to point B because this was not a random, triggered attack, this was a personal, targeted attack. He seemingly spent quite a bit of time with them, behaving oddly and leaving behind signatures of himself. I've been wrong about a lot of things, and this could be another, but it's my feeling as of today that this was intensely purposeful to him. JMO.

 

[GA_Peach]

They could simply chamber a round then rack it out to check the markings on that round to see if they match.

But here's the problem with that. SIx years have passed, and if RA has been using his firearm, there will be additional wear. And the markings should no longer match. It reminds me of a certain glove. "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit." And an acquittal is exactly what happened.

 

[Chuckwagon22]

Joseph Scott Morgan, help!!

To my knowledge, and PLEASE someone correct me if you have information, ejecting an unspent round from a magazine leaves no marks that conclusively tie it to a specific magazine or a specific gun. In fact, I have an extra clip for each of my handguns. I've ejected rounds from my extra clips without those clips ever coming in contact with the guns, not with those rounds in it. Exactly when was this round discovered? Was his gun registered? It took how many years to narrow down a suspect list, and they had this bullet?? That makes no sense. Rounds don't just jump unspent out of a clip. No gun shot was heard. And a suppressor, in my very novice opinion, would render a round useless for comparison without having the gun and the suppressor. Even if a comparison could be made, what bloody idiot keeps a murder weapon and puts it back in its usual spot?

Nothing about his behavior is indicative of guilt, behavior in 2017 or 2022. On the other hand, the secrecy insisted upon by the state, contending that minors would be at risk even if the redacted PCA was released, leaves much to be desired. IMOO, evidence in the PCA was so thin, I don't see how the search warrant was secured in the first place. Further, if their PC was so strong, why did they need to wait, what, 10 days after executing the search to arrest him? (Especially when a witness now comes forward to say she saw a man "resembling" RA walking toward a car "resembling" the Ford Focus he owned.) Now that the 5'8"-5'10" suspect is revealed to be a 5'4" male who doesn't look a thing like either sketch, how is it that people suddenly have such a clear recollection that that are certain they saw RA? And RA's memory is the one with which some people take issue? How many times since 2017 did his accusers hear his voice, see his face?

And the more they keep saying it was a good idea to release both sketches and that the case is still very active, the more innocent RA appears. This case has been one Charlie Foxtrot after another. I hope they've got a mountain of evidence; otherwise, Mr. and Mrs. RA are going to own Carroll County. Equally tragic would be the justice delayed for A,L and their families.

Agreed. This whole thing REEKS.

 

[lji]

Long time lurker here, first time poster. This isn’t necessarily a reply to anything specific but just some thoughts on the case overall, apologies if I end up rambling!

I’m 99.9% sure that RA is Bridge Guy. I mean his own admission to being on the trails that day (and wearing the same clothes), the witness statements, the unspent bullet matching the same model of gun that he has…he would have to be the most unlucky guy in the world for it not to be him.

I feel like he spoke to the conservation officer for two reasons:
1) - He knew he had been seen by multiple people and was maybe worried his phone would be found to have pinged in the area. If he were to deny or not come forward then it would make him look suspicious as hell.
2) - This is only my opinion but I’m using personal experience to hazard a guess. I used to have a bit of a drinking problem where I’d get blackout drunk in my local city and not remember getting home at all. Sometimes I’d remember parts that just made no sense to me at all (getting a bus half way home and then randomly getting off and getting a taxi the rest of the way).
Long story short I’d have such terrible anxiety the next morning that I’d contact my local police through their web chat and ask if they had reports of anything happening in the area where I’d last remember (i.e a fight happening on the bus that I was involved in which meant me getting off the bus halfway). Of course nothing ever happened and it just was my drink problem mixed with my horrendous anxiety and overthinking. I’m wondering whether RA, having realised the gravity of what he had done to Abby and Libby, spoke to the officer to try and get more info on what LE knew therefore calming his own anxiety about getting caught?

In terms of whether it was targeted or not…I’m so undecided. I can see him targeting a complete stranger if they were on their own. Targeting two who are unknown to him on the other hand is very brave, whether or not they were young girls, he had a gun etc etc. I feel like the risk is far greater than the reward.
If we knew he had killed before then the escalation to killing two could make sense, I just feel it’s a very risky crime to commit (2 victims, day time, there’s always a risk of people being around whether you’ve checked or not) if it’s your first one (again we don’t know that).
That’s what’s leading me to believing it was targeted. But how did he know they were there (unless someone like KK was involved)….that’s the part that’s making me scratch my head.
And if the rumours are to be believed that Libby’s death was the more gruesome one, then that shows it was more personal towards Libby and Abby was maybe collateral damage?

As always on these forums, these are purely my opinions only

 

[Chuckwagon22]

Long time lurker here, first time poster. This isn’t necessarily a reply to anything specific but just some thoughts on the case overall, apologies if I end up rambling!

I’m 99.9% sure that RA is Bridge Guy. I mean his own admission to being on the trails that day (and wearing the same clothes), the witness statements, the unspent bullet matching the same model of gun that he has…he would have to be the most unlucky guy in the world for it not to be him.

I feel like he spoke to the conservation officer for two reasons:
1) - He knew he had been seen by multiple people and was maybe worried his phone would be found to have pinged in the area. If he were to deny or not come forward then it would make him look suspicious as hell.
2) - This is only my opinion but I’m using personal experience to hazard a guess. I used to have a bit of a drinking problem where I’d get blackout drunk in my local city and not remember getting home at all. Sometimes I’d remember parts that just made no sense to me at all (getting a bus half way home and then randomly getting off and getting a taxi the rest of the way).
Long story short I’d have such terrible anxiety the next morning that I’d contact my local police through their web chat and ask if they had reports of anything happening in the area where I’d last remember (i.e a fight happening on the bus that I was involved in which meant me getting off the bus halfway). Of course nothing ever happened and it just was my drink problem mixed with my horrendous anxiety and overthinking. I’m wondering whether RA, having realised the gravity of what he had done to Abby and Libby, spoke to the officer to try and get more info on what LE knew therefore calming his own anxiety about getting caught?

In terms of whether it was targeted or not…I’m so undecided. I can see him targeting a complete stranger if they were on their own. Targeting two who are unknown to him on the other hand is very brave, whether or not they were young girls, he had a gun etc etc. I feel like the risk is far greater than the reward.
If we knew he had killed before then the escalation to killing two could make sense, I just feel it’s a very risky crime to commit (2 victims, day time, there’s always a risk of people being around whether you’ve checked or not) if it’s your first one (again we don’t know that).
That’s what’s leading me to believing it was targeted. But how did he know they were there (unless someone like KK was involved)….that’s the part that’s making me scratch my head.
And if the rumours are to be believed that Libby’s death was the more gruesome one, then that shows it was more personal towards Libby and Abby was maybe collateral damage?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't it say right in the PCA that his phone had not pinged in the area?

 

[lji]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't it say right in the PCA that his phone had not pinged in the area?

I think you’re correct if I remember rightly. However at the time of speaking to the conservation officer, RA probably wouldn’t have known it hadn’t so thought he’d admit to being there just in case his phone had pinged.

 

[scapa]

But the jeans are clearly blue. That’s the part that throws me off, when the witness describes him being in all black.

Quick glance, dark blue coat and possibly black face covering. Witness focuses on the thing out of place -- the face covering, or dark blue jacket -- and remembers the BG as being dressed in "black" instead of "dark."

Such is memory.

Is a DT likely to harp on it? Sure.

Was she mistaken? Almost certainly not. IMO.

 

[TL4S]

Quick glance, dark blue coat and possibly black face covering. Witness focuses on the thing out of place -- the face covering, or dark blue jacket -- and remembers the BG as being dressed in "black" instead of "dark."

Such is memory.

Is a DT likely to harp on it? Sure.

Was she mistaken? Almost certainly not. IMO.

Speaking of memory...

Another thing RA told the CO was that there were vehicles parked at the High Bridge trail head, but he didn't pay attention to them. Except there weren't vehicles parked there, were there? I don't know which trail head he was referring to, but his was parked at the CPS lot, and nobody was in the lot across from Mears until around 1:46, when the lady witness parked there shortly before KG got there. We know RA was already at the bridge when that lady got to the bridge, so he couldn't have seen her park. I thought the vehicle witnesses seemed to be saying that the car in question (small SUV) was the only one in the CPS lot. ??

 

[NLM1234]

An unspent round by nature requires a bullet and a case (which holds a primer, gunpowder, and by tension the bullet together for a complete cartridge). But in my experience people often call rounds bullets or vice versa - like the never ending gun nut argument over the proper use of magazine vs. clip. In any event, the examiner indicated the match was made via extractor marks which are on the case and not the bullet proper. Once a round is cycled, it may exhibit extractor marks on the case whether it is fired or not, just by virtue of being engaged by the extractor in the process of chambering and unchambering.

If you are making the point that there was no unspent case found (which of course do exist, say fresh brass for reloaders and such), I'd agree and then apologize for the explanation above.

Further edit: So I'm not too inaccurate, it's the PCA that says the round had extractor marks on it and then cites an examiner match via cycling.

Thank you for this explanation. For those of us who are not familiar with gun vocabulary, it is very helpful.

 

[TL4S]

I think you’re correct if I remember rightly. However at the time of speaking to the conservation officer, RA probably wouldn’t have known it hadn’t so thought he’d admit to being there just in case his phone had pinged.

I don't know if it was said anywhere in the PCA about his phone pinging. It just lists his phone's MEID numbers and that it didn't list a IMEI number. I'm still curious what that means. With no IMEI number, could he still connect to the server to check his stock ticker?

 

[EllaMinnowP]

<snip> I'm not disputing the accuracy of the quote. I'm highly skeptical of the veracity of the claim. MOO

<Snip>

Nothing about his behavior is indicative of guilt, behavior in 2017 or 2022. On the other hand, the secrecy insisted upon by the state, contending that minors would be at risk even if the redacted PCA was released, leaves much to be desired. IMOO, evidence in the PCA was so thin, I don't see how the search warrant was secured in the first place. Further, if their PC was so strong, why did they need to wait, what, 10 days after executing the search to arrest him? (Especially when a witness now comes forward to say she saw a man "resembling" RA walking toward a car "resembling" the Ford Focus he owned.) Now that the 5'8"-5'10" suspect is revealed to be a 5'4" male who doesn't look a thing like either sketch, how is it that people suddenly have such a clear recollection that that are certain they saw RA? And RA's memory is the one with which some people take issue? How many times since 2017 did his accusers hear his voice, see his face?

And the more they keep saying it was a good idea to release both sketches and that the case is still very active, the more innocent RA appears. This case has been one Charlie Foxtrot after another. I hope they've got a mountain of evidence; otherwise, Mr. and Mrs. RA are going to own Carroll County. Equally tragic would be the justice delayed for A,L and their families.

RSBM
I admire the way that you express your thoughts.

You’ve touched on several of the issues that are preventing my confidence in/ enthusiasm for the charges against RA.
If he is BG, hopefully items collected from his property will have DNA or some other indisputable evidence. If so, then he nearly has to be a serial killer (imo) to be so brazen as to tell LE what he has told them, plus keeping everything that was used on the day of the murder.
It’s immature of me, I know, but when his mugshot was released, I was creeped out by his face. I thought maybe it was the creepiest thing I had ever seen around Halloween time. When I read the PCA, I felt a tinge of guilt for being repulsed by RA’s face, since to me it was about the least convincing PCA that I’ve ever seen and I was surprised it was enough for a judge to approve. Thinking about that reminded me of the lack of professionalism displayed by that signing judge directly after the arrest was announced. It just doesn’t breed confidence in me.
On the other hand, we haven’t seen the application for search warrant of RA’s property. Maybe that’s where the meaty stuff is. Would the current judge have seen all of those documents by the first hearing? I ask because imo there should be something more than the scant and contradictory PCA holding the suspect without a bail hearing from October- February, right?
Then again, I feel that if that same shaky PCA had happened in 2017, I’d feel much differently than I do now from an acceptance standpoint.

I’m all kinds of conflicted about this case currently! Reading everyone’s thoughts here is giving me whiplash because I agree with points from posters on both sides of nearly every topic being debated here. I’ll think it’s settled in my mind and then here comes another excellent post that warrants consideration, imo.
I appreciate the respect that WS members afford one another when discussing opposing views. It truly is refreshing.

 

[lji]

I don't know if it was said anywhere in the PCA about his phone pinging. It just lists his phone's MEID numbers and that it didn't list a IMEI number. I'm still curious what that means. With no IMEI number, could he still connect to the server to check his stock ticker?

Sorry that’s my fault, I probably should’ve worded it better in my original post. I don’t think they do have his phone pinging in the area but he may have thought at the time of speaking to the CO that it could’ve done.

On the subject of the IMEI number I can’t say I’m too clued up on that side of things unfortunately so wouldn’t know. As others have said I do find it odd that he specifically mentioned stocks that he was checking rather than saying “yeah I was probably just on my phone browsing *enter generic apps here* while I was walking”.
Unless he purposely had the stock app/website open while he was waiting for A & L so if his phone was checked nearer the time he could say “See, told you I was looking at stocks”

 

[Quim The Extraordinaire]

I get the thinking behind coming forward in 2017. I wonder the thinking being agreeing to be reinterviewed in 2022 and answering the specific questions that he did. Why would his clothing be relevant if they didn’t suspect him? Why not say you don’t remember what you were wearing 5 years ago? Was the question asked whether that was him in the video? Why answer questions about a gun?

It is so perplexing, it makes me think it’s a sign of innocence. Which would then be a reason to do exactly as he did. And then that circular thought process makes my head spin.

JMO.

@BlaiseFinlay, great post and I’ve been mulling this over.

The first re-interview in 2022 was Oct. 13.

(Fox News) On Oct. 13, following interviews with Allen, investigators executed a search warrant at his residence and found "jackets, boots, knives and firearms, including a Sig Sauer, Model P226, .40 caliber pistol with serial number U 625 627," the affidavit says.

(New York Post) Non-uniform officers searched Richard Allen’s home, which he shared with wife Kathy, and their property for about 12 hours, according to neighbors.

He was likely taken by surprise by the first interview and rolled with the flow in terms of answering questions. They likely questioned his wife separately, so he would know that she’d repeat whatever he had told her over the years — so he wouldn’t want to cross her up. I’m sure he pointed out he came forward early on.

I’m most interested in his behavior between Oct. 13 and 26, when his second interview took place. Neighbors and others reportedly have said that he continued his normal routine.

Oxygen:
On Oct. 26, Allen voluntarily walked into an Indiana State Police post, claiming he had no explanation as to why the bullet was found near the girls’ bodies. He also said he “never allowed anyone to use or borrow” the firearm in question.

The PC Affadavit and media reports note that the interview was “voluntary;” I assume he was invited.

Was he taken into custody following the Oct. 26 interview?

I lean toward him just continuing to do what had worked so far: being helpful and blending in.

He wasn’t a sophisticated criminal and this wasn’t a sophisticated crime — he simply benefited from a few fluke occurrences that allowed him to escape detection for too long.

I don’t think he had a plan beyond not getting caught.

My great respect to Abby and Libby, who helped catch their own killer, to their families, to Delphi, and YES, to LE who refused to give up on this case.

JMO.

 

[EllaMinnowP]

<snip>
I would like to believe police got their man but I could have believed RL was guilty too because of all that was in his warrant doc. In that one they told us what he did before and after the crime. In the matter or RA this is all missing. Why?

RSBM
I agree that RL search warrant application looked damning. Before I read it, I thought all of the scuttlebutt about his potential involvement were ludicrous for several reasons. After I read it, he was a strong suspect in my mind.
Maybe search warrant application for RA will be just as convincing as RL’s was in my eyes. More importantly, I hope that the results of the search warrant are that irrefutable evidence against the murderer was collected.

 

[MichMan015]

Police have been looking for some digital evidence of photo’s or video. RA tells the CO he did not take any pictures or video.(strange comment) I am sure the police are going through his devices. Video or pictures have been mentioned in search warrants for RL and KK. Somehow police think there are photos. Question- if you take a video or picture and sometime later transfer it to a storage device and erase it from your phone, can it still be found on your phone and in the cloud if the police search for it?

 

[Trebor5591]

One major question I've always had about this case is why in the hell the killer made the girls, and himself, cross the creek. JH told us all the reenactments are inaccurate.

What if RA made the girls go DTH, and right there in the woods below the bridge, made them undress and whatever else. IDK. Likely, L's phone was not in her hand, but somewhere on the ground. If, by chance, they were still there at 3:11 when L's dad called her phone (or even just anyone called), maybe the phone ringing, and possibly L saying her dad was looking for them, freaked RA out and he was worried he'd get caught, so he ordered them to toss their clothes near the water, cross the creek, killed them and tried to hide them, then tried to sneak out through the woods, up to the road, maybe through the fields, all to avoid the trail and L's dad.

In my opinion, Allen did not make the girls cross the creek. The girls made a break for it and ran away from hi,--unfortunately they ran across the creek, maybe in their panic they hoped they could distance themselves from him, but he followed and was able to catch them just across the creek. My opinion only.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't it say right in the PCA that his phone had not pinged in the area?

No, the only thing it says about his phone is this:



I don't understand it, but some phones have the IMEI, and others have the MEID.
The PCA didn't mention anything about his phone pings.

 

[m00c0w]

I don't know if it was said anywhere in the PCA about his phone pinging. It just lists his phone's MEID numbers and that it didn't list a IMEI number. I'm still curious what that means. With no IMEI number, could he still connect to the server to check his stock ticker?

Sorry that’s my fault, I probably should’ve worded it better in my original post. I don’t think they do have his phone pinging in the area but he may have thought at the time of speaking to the CO that it could’ve done.

On the subject of the IMEI number I can’t say I’m too clued up on that side of things unfortunately so wouldn’t know. As others have said I do find it odd that he specifically mentioned stocks that he was checking rather than saying “yeah I was probably just on my phone browsing *enter generic apps here* while I was walking”.
Unless he purposely had the stock app/website open while he was waiting for A & L so if his phone was checked nearer the time he could say “See, told you I was looking at stocks”

IMEI is used for GSM networks (AT&T, Tmo, etc), while ESN or MEID are used for CDMA networks (Verizon, Sprint). It’s just a unique identifier for the phone that is registered with a carrier to allow the device on their network.

As far as pings, those generally refer to E911 responses from phones in real-time at the direction of a court order. They wouldn’t be able to get pings because they only exist in real-time. They, however, would be able to look at tower dumps and see if that MEID appeared and also get a search warrant for phone records and get historical tower data from his phone in particular. That may or may not be very fruitful depending on the network, location of towers, and cellular activity at the time.

JMO

 

[iamnotagolem]

I'm still stuck on the press release from the defense attorney. Why would they mention "did not throw out his clothing" if their strategy is "Rick is innocent". Why even mention the clothes?

If he's innocent, then he's not BG and his clothes aren't the clothes BG was wearing, so why would what he wore that day matter if he wasn't the killer.

The defense attorney mentioning RA still owning the clothes from that day points more to guilt than innocence. They could have simply not mentioned the clothes.

 

[Quim The Extraordinaire]

<Respectfully Snipped By Me for Response>

I would like to believe police got their man but I could have believed RL was guilty too because of all that was in his warrant doc. In that one they told us what he did before and after the crime. In the matter or RA this is all missing. Why?

JMO.

RA admitted to being in the area of the crime scene during the time of the crime, so they focused the PC Affadavit on explaining the evidence that points to RA being the killer. RA volunteered this information and did not have an alibi.

RL tried to establish an alibi for being away from the crime scene during the time of the crime. To establish probable cause for the search warrant, they needed to counter RL’s alibi and establish he had the opportunity — he could have been at the crime scene when the crimes occurred — to commit or otherwise be involved with the crime.

That’s why they use RA’s own words in his PC Affadavit.

JMO.