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

[Ontario Mom]

I do not think this has been a botched investigation. Honestly, I understand why people are frustrated by it, but I love that they have played it close to the vest.

So one person apparently leaks info (years ago) about the unspent bullet and now this other guy claims to have pics of the actual crime scene. That's not very close to the vest as far as I'm concerned.

Unless... the knowledge of the bullet is just not true, and the crime scene photo guy from CT (whatever his name is, he's new to me) is full of baloney.

jmo

 

[Deathsgrandaughter]

The older I get the more I am convinced that evil exists as a spiritual force and is active in this world.

I do agree, but my parish priest used to console, when I was in a very difficult position with a particular person, that good can always be better, but evil cannot be more evil. Maybe it's just semantics, but it cheered me.

 

[CNYDarkStar]

In the Court TV interview, Todd says he has three photos of the girl’s clothes in the creek. Then he alludes to what he believes that means and other lurid inside information he claims he has regarding posing of bodies etc., which can easily be confused with him having crime scene photos of the bodies.
Maybe that was intentional. Jmo
I checked the transcript to make sure I got it right.

This guy neither has anything nor knows anything. Just another glomming-on merch-seller.

 

[Yvettea]

So one person apparently leaks info (years ago) about the unspent bullet and now this other guy claims to have pics of the actual crime scene. That's not very close to the vest as far as I'm concerned.

Unless... the knowledge of the bullet is just not true, and the crime scene photo guy from CT (whatever his name is, he's new to me) is full of baloney.

jmo

This information about the unspent bullet seems to mentioned in a recent Murder Sheet podcast? Not just the bullet itself but an earlier leak of that information.

 

[CNYDarkStar]

Could these pictures in fact be pictures taken by the killer(s) at the scene and published on the dark web. This makes me sick to post.

Good point. Could be but I highly doubt it.

I'd be more inclined to believe this snake oil salesman faked the entire thing. Anyone could have gotten some clothes and put them near a creek and taken pictures.

 

[TL4S]

Didn't we hear about RA's Ford Focus getting towed away after the search of his house? Do we know if that Focus was a hatchback model?

 

[photographer4]

Dear @taylorss ,

Great post, as usual !

I'm certain R.A. will regret saying, quoting your words, "RA said he’s never been to the spot"

By saying this, he has removed any "reasons/excuses" for anything of his (DNA? fingerprints?)
that was found there, including of course an unspent bullet that is a match to his gun.

I believe that the above statement he made is extremely important and will play out in trial.

JMO

UNLESS - could he have been in a search party in the area looking for the kids? I assume not, or we'd surely have heard about it since his lawyers seemed eager to tell us he is so innocent?

 

[Zapoleon]

Now that the PCA has come out (and obviously they probably have more than what's in there), but I am still personally confused on the new/second sketch put out in April 2019 and how that figured into all of this, especially since they didn't seem to be on RA's track at all until just this past Oct. And IMO the second sketch doesn't resemble him at all.

Sorry if this has been covered - I've tried to read every post since the PCA came out but hard to keep up completely. Is this just another witness's remembering of what RA looked like on the trail that day? Because none of the witnesses in the PCA mentioned seeing two men, correct? I'm still really lost on why this new sketch came out two years after the murders and who it was of.

Hard to know. We know the second released sketch was actually the first created by a witness a few days after the murders. However clearly the first released sketch was the one they felt more confident with hence they released it. Remember that sketch was created second.
Things get more complicated when you consider Police said they had ID'ed and ruled out the person depicted in the first released sketch. Hence why they released the second sketch. You know the one which was created first.
Then things get even more confusing when Police seemed to take back that comment, as they later claimed the suspect could be a mix of both sketches.
How can it be a mixture of both if the first guy had been ruled out?
Until we get to trial I don't think anyone will understand the whole sketch thing.

 

[Zapoleon]

he have been in a search party in the area looking for the kids? I assume not, or we'd surely have heard about

Even then the bullet was found between the bodies. So he would have to have been the one to have found the bodies, for there to even be a chance to try and sell that story.

 

[raja]

Hard to know. We know the second released sketch was actually the first created by a witness a few days after the murders. However clearly the first released sketch was the one they felt more confident with hence they released it. Remember that sketch was created second.
Things get more complicated when you consider Police said they had ID'ed and ruled out the person depicted in the first released sketch. Hence why they released the second sketch. You know the one which was created first.
Then things get even more confusing when Police seemed to take back that comment, as they later claimed the suspect could be a mix of both sketches.
How can it be a mixture of both if the first guy had been ruled out?
Until we get to trial I don't think anyone will understand the whole sketch thing.

I still think the first sketch released was drawn from the video. This could explain a mixture of both. Think about it if the were trying to do a rendering of what they see in the video it would be a sketch. Surely they tried to capture in some way what the person in the video looked like. I seriously believe that was the first sketch released jmho

 

[taylorss]

Yeah on the plain evidence he’s just so done it’s hard to find more to say about it IMO

A technology-related Q for anyone w relevant knowledge- the PCA quotes the original 2017 “tip narrative” saying:

His cellphone did not list an IMEI

Anyone know why or how his cellphone would not list an IMEI (in 2017) ?
AFAIK a IMEI is a factory-installed unique identifier for tracking…. but no idea what it means for a phone to not “list” it ??

 

[TL4S]

At the 2018 CrimeCon, JH describes how the first released sketch came about. Basically, LE took months to interview all the witnesses who saw the bridge guy that day, investigating to make sure who they saw was indeed the bridge guy and not somebody else. Once LE felt confident, they had these witnesses work with a sketch artist, who would draw the sketch, have the witnesses come back to see if anything needed changed, etc, until he had the final sketch, which was released in Aug. 2017.
Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights

After reading the PCA, I believe the witnesses who were used for that sketch were the girls he saw near Freedom Bridge, possibly Trail Woman, and possibly "muddy and bloody" woman. JMO.

In regards to the second released sketch, drawn only 3 days after the bodies were found:

In vague terms, Bryant told the Star the image was based on the description of a man by a witness who reported seeing something they felt needed to be reported. The sketch is a "ballpark estimation of what the person looks like."

'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says

Maybe Trail Woman or "muddy and bloody" woman is the source for this sketch, since they apparently only saw him at a distance, but I have a feeling not. I don't think the witness (singular) for this sketch was any of the witnesses in the PCA, but that's strictly MOO. The second released sketch has darker wavy hair, no facial hair, and quite a bit younger looking than the first sketch.

 

[zencompass]

UNLESS - could he have been in a search party in the area looking for the kids? I assume not, or we'd surely have heard about it since his lawyers seemed eager to tell us he is so innocent?

Dear @photographer4,

Great point - if he hadn't said he'd never been in that area.

If R.A. hadn't claimed he'd never been in that spot, that would have been a wonderful excuse as to why his unspent bullet fell in that area.

Unfortunately for R.A., he said he's never been in that spot. So he can't use that excuse.

I can't tell you how glad I am that he made that statement that he'd never been in that area.

R.A. shut down any reasons/excuses as to why the unspent bullet or any of his DNA in that area
would have been there.

He could have told his defense attorneys that he was in that area the day before and must have dropped an unspent bullet out of his pocket. But he hurt his defense by saying what he did.

it would have been a great argument for the defense - they could have said R.A. was there 2 days prior around that area and must have dropped an unspent bullet, out of an old jacket pocket.

R.A., in making that statement of never being in that spot, removed some great defense arguments.


JMO

 

[photographer4]

Dear @photographer4,

Great point - if he hadn't said he'd never been in that area.

If R.A. hadn't claimed he'd never been in that spot, that would have been a wonderful excuse as to why his unspent bullet fell in that area.

Unfortunately for R.A., he said he's never been in that spot. So he can't use that excuse.

I can't tell you how glad I am that he made that statement that he'd never been in that area.

R.A. shut down any reasons/excuses as to why the unspent bullet or any of his DNA in that area
would have been there.

He could have told his defense attorneys that he was in that area the day before and must have dropped an unspent bullet out of his pocket. But he hurt his defense by saying what he did.

it would have been a great argument for the defense - they could have said R.A. was there 2 days prior around that area and must have dropped an unspent bullet, out of an old jacket pocket.

R.A., in making that statement of never being in that spot, removed some great defense arguments.

Very true and I'm so exhausted I actually forgot he'd said he'd never been there! And he cannot (did not) explain why the bullet was there - so I hope that bullet is a dead match to his gun, and his alone!

 

[UnapologeticallyAspie]

On YT this morning I see this from 3 days ago. Is it just me or does anyone else see various degrees of healing from different injuries on RA’s face/head, too?

IMOO ymmv JMVHO

 

[zencompass]

Very true and I'm so exhausted I actually forgot he'd said he'd never been there! And he cannot (did not) explain why the bullet was there - so I hope that bullet is a dead match to his gun, and his alone!

Dear @photographer4,

I hope so too!

My thought is that the L.E. acquired solid evidence along with the unspent bullet that they didn't disclose in their PCA.

We've discussed possibilities of discovery of the girls' DNA in R.A.'s car, his jacket, his boots, whatever was taken by L.E. in the shed.

I'm hoping that there was DNA (nuclear or mtDNA) recovered from the crime scene that matches with R.A. Maybe a cigarette butt found in that area?

I truly feel that I will be astonished at the amount of solid evidence presented at the trial.

Maybe it's because my hope is so great - but I really do think they have solid evidence that we don't know about yet - until the trial.


JMO

 

[WingsOverTX]

UNLESS - could he have been in a search party in the area looking for the kids? I assume not, or we'd surely have heard about it since his lawyers seemed eager to tell us he is so innocent?

I'm unconvinced his lawyers think he is innocent. It's their job to say: "If you have evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, present it. Our client declares innocence." One of the reasons RA is playing dumb is for defense purposes. He enjoys playing a cat & mouse game - "catch me if you can"!

I think he has committed other crimes as yet unsolved & hiding in plain sight is something he cultivated as a form of superiority over others.

By giving LE a narrative that fits the evidence, he gets a sort of power in knowing they still have to jump through many legal hoops to convict him. A perp who says, "Yes, I agree I look guilty but am innocent as the day is long" is an anomaly but thankfully so is the horrible crime of taking two lives.

RA can spread fear just by having been an innocuous neighbor, bar mate, pool player & steady presence at the local CVS. It's disgusting & evil but getting away with hiding this crime (and likely others) for so long while placing himself solidly at the scene is a thrill for him.

Now that he sees the jig is up, a day he knew would come, the only thing left is to say, "prove it."

He has been out in society too long. Let's hope he never lives among us again. I, for one, think he knows prison food & a walled off existence is the only future he can anticipate now.
JMO

 

[M. Kay]

In vague terms, Bryant told the Star the image was based on the description of a man by a witness who reported seeing something they felt needed to be reported. The sketch is a "ballpark estimation of what the person looks like."
'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says
I don't think the witness (singular) for this sketch was any of the witnesses in the PCA, but that's strictly MOO. The second released sketch has darker wavy hair, no facial hair, and quite a bit younger looking than the first sketch.

I know that I don't know; yet agree with second sketch not being PCA person. Have long thought newer sketch was from slumber party girl relating Libby's A_Shots crush. (Photo of hunky cop- model). Her ID must still be protected as underage witness too! Some disagree on this...yet #2 may have encouraged other girls to come forward.

 

[Boxer]

Dear @photographer4,

Great point - if he hadn't said he'd never been in that area.

If R.A. hadn't claimed he'd never been in that spot, that would have been a wonderful excuse as to why his unspent bullet fell in that area.

Unfortunately for R.A., he said he's never been in that spot. So he can't use that excuse.

I can't tell you how glad I am that he made that statement that he'd never been in that area.

R.A. shut down any reasons/excuses as to why the unspent bullet or any of his DNA in that area
would have been there.

He could have told his defense attorneys that he was in that area the day before and must have dropped an unspent bullet out of his pocket. But he hurt his defense by saying what he did.

it would have been a great argument for the defense - they could have said R.A. was there 2 days prior around that area and must have dropped an unspent bullet, out of an old jacket pocket.

R.A., in making that statement of never being in that spot, removed some great defense arguments.


JMO

He could have. But the only criteria for felony murder is that a felony you commit ends in a murder. Just kidnapping on the bridge is going to enough.
MOO If someone else is involved he will negotiate.

 

[TL4S]

I know that I don't know; yet agree with second sketch not being PCA person. Have long thought newer sketch was from slumber party girl relating Libby's A_Shots crush. (Photo of hunky cop- model). Her ID must still be protected as underage witness too! Some disagree on this...yet #2 may have encouraged other girls to come forward.

It is really striking to me that on the ISP and FBI Delphi sites, the younger sketch is still up. I know they removed the description back in March, but RA's age, facial hair, hair, etc. seem to match better to the first sketch released. IDK. I'm starting to wonder greatly on who this YBG sketch witness was and what they saw. I, too, think it might be from an online profile. I don't think it's a_shots, though, simply because if they wanted a_shots tips, they could use that model's photo, just like they did in the a_shots release. I'm starting to wonder if that YBG sketch wasn't a different online profile, but one maybe they don't have a photo of, because the witness saw it in passing and couldn't find it again, or maybe even someone they saw in a video chat.