Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #161

[FrostedGlass]

What McL is referring to is the defense request for summaries of statements. Let's say that there is a 4 hour recorded interview. The defense could 1) listen to the interview in its entirety or 2) read the summary of someone that listened to the interview. This would be, as McL put it, be doing the work for them. It would not be withholding exculpatory evidence to not provide a summary because the defense has already been provided the entire interview. The prosecution is required to hand over all evidence to the defense, not provide them a road map

We don't know if defense has listened to the example interview or not. I couldn't imagine not wanting to see the following, especially since McL has hinted at other person/s being involved.

1.) a statement attesting to exculpatory evidence favorable to Allen
2.) a summary of the state’s opinions on statements made by Allen or witnesses

 

[TTF14]

Just those of us who are in the "someone else is likely to be involved" camp

Gotcha. I'll see you in the dining hall!

 

[somequestions]

this is one case that would never have been solved if it wasn't for the suspect giving himself up on a silver platter ..he even admitted being at the crime scene.. wearing the same clothes.. and meeting witnesses without the presence of a lawyer
in case if one le wants to take any credit ..it wont happen

At this time, this is only if the current suspect is the killer of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.

 

[somequestions]

Only the current suspect and the victims, Abigail Williams and Liberty German, know if he is the actual killer. If he is the killer, he is unique.

The audio recording from this case was all over the news. If you knew that police had your voice on tape, would you voluntarily speak with them?

 

[Betty P]

Just as they did in Idaho.

Yes, and in Pike County, OH, when early one spring morning, 8 people were found murdered in their beds in 4 different homes. The sheriff immediately called the Ohio BCI, who took control of the investigation and crime scenes within an hour. Had they tried to process those crime scenes and bodies on their own, they never would have been able to prosecute the killers.

Too many states have cut budgets to the bone for local law enforcement. With all the technology necessary for murder investigations, it can be difficult for departments that only have a murder every few years or so.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Only the current suspect and the victims, Abigail Williams and Liberty German, know if he is the actual killer. If he is the killer, he is unique.

The audio recording from this case was all over the news. If you knew that police had your voice on tape, would you voluntarily speak with them?

RA spoke to them before the video and audio were released to the public.
jmo

 

[Betty P]

What McL is referring to is the defense request for summaries of statements. Let's say that there is a 4 hour recorded interview. The defense could 1) listen to the interview in its entirety or 2) read the summary of someone that listened to the interview. This would be, as McL put it, be doing the work for them. It would not be withholding exculpatory evidence to not provide a summary because the defense has already been provided the entire interview. The prosecution is required to hand over all evidence to the defense, not provide them a road map

In the Pike County, OH murder trials, the defense teams demanded dozens of hours of interviews and LE recordings be transcribed by a professional. It took several months and cost a great deal of money. When it was done, the defense attorneys demanded the state pay for an expert consultant to organize all the evidence for them. That took a few more months and cost tens of thousands of dollars. In all, the pre-trial phase took nearly 4 years.

 

[steeltowngirl]

The image of bridge guy is so blurry and grainy that it look like a lot makes in the Midwest so you can’t use that alone to say it’s Richard Allen.

Agree that they couldn’t use the image alone to say it was RA. Lord knows many tried, resulting in thousands of side-by-sides showing up on social media.

But RA is the only known man to strongly resemble the image AND to have self-admitted to being on the bridge between 1:30 and 3:30 pm on 2/13/17. And to own a gun that matches the unspent bullet found next to Libby and Abby, who mentioned on their audio seeing their assailant with a gun.

I expect there is more evidence to be presented at trial.

jmo

 

[somequestions]

RA spoke to them before the video and audio were released to the public.
jmo

I did not know that. Then he decided to speak to police before he even had a reason to speak with them? It must have been the witnesses who saw him on the trail that day that made him decide to do that. I think in a case like this I would want to be sure I had the right person. Maybe police do have the right person, but the evidence has not been released yet?

Maybe his fingerprints are on the unspent bullet? That would be hard evidence to explain away. Former prosecutor Ives said there was lots of evidence left at the scene of the crime.

If a person gives police their name, would they not also assume the police could look up anything attached to their name?

 

[steeltowngirl]

I did not know that. Then he decided to speak to police before he even had a reason to speak with them? It must have been the witnesses who saw him on the trail that day that made him decide to do that. I think in a case like this I would want to be sure I had the right person. Maybe police do have the right person, but the evidence has not been released yet?

Maybe his fingerprints are on the unspent bullet? That would be hard evidence to explain away. Former prosecutor Ives said there was lots of evidence left at the scene of the crime.

If a person gives police their name, would they not also assume the police could look up anything attached to their name?

Question wasn’t to me, but I’d like to share my thoughts.

RA was “pre-splaining“. He knew he’d been seen by the three young witnesses. He gave a premeditated alibi of being on the bridge to watch fish. This is where he began to hide in plain sight.

It was a shrewd and strategic move by RA.
Hallmark of a skilled manipulator.

jmo

 

[everybodhi]

We don't know if defense has listened to the example interview or not. I couldn't imagine not wanting to see the following, especially since McL has hinted at other person/s being involved.

1.) a statement attesting to exculpatory evidence favorable to Allen
2.) a summary of the state’s opinions on statements made by Allen or witnesses

The state is not required to provide any statement explaining a dang thing, the judge said the prosecution has been diligent turning over the records, that’s the best the defense can hope for.
All they are required to do is send the records, it is the job of the defense to analyze them.
The prosecution isn’t required to give their opinion on any evidence, in essence, point out for the defense how they will use the evidence to get a conviction, that would be crazy!
The process has begun. It is “thousands upon thousands” of pages, in the judge’s words. I’m sure it will come in lots as it takes time to gather and prepare. Jmo
The police investigation records should show anyone else who they suspect or suspected being involved and the details of their investigation of that person or people, it’s not like they are hiding that information, it’s even in the PCA.
I assume they start sending records from the beginning, Feb 13, and work to the present.
The state has also said they continue to investigate, the records on that should come in later, as it progresses.

Edited to add: as @Betty P said, this will take years.
There will be many preliminary hearings arguing over what evidence can be used in court. Continuances will be requested and granted while the lawyers analyze the evidence and prepare their arguments before it goes to trial. Jmo

 

[getthefax]

Where are we hearing that the prosecution refused to turn over evidence? I assumed that was just “what if” speculation.
Sorry, I haven’t been keeping up with my websleuths threads but I’m not finding any reports of that in the media.
I’m only seeing that the trove of evidence will take time for the prosecution to gather and copy and then additional time for the defense to examine it all to prepare for trial.

What’s happening with the discovery request?
“The lengthy “Supplemental Motion for Discovery and Request for Rule 404 and Rule 405 Evidence” filed on Dec. 30 seeks the names and addresses of all witnesses involved in the case, including recorded or transcribed statements. Allen’s attorneys also want the names and addresses of individuals who may have knowledge of the case but aren’t being called as witnesses by the state.”
“The motion includes 29 components. It seeks everything from phone records and cell phone location data to written reports and witness accounts connected to the case, along with any investigatory information obtained by law enforcement.”

Here’s what happened during Richard Allen’s hearing in the Delphi case
BBM
“[Judge] Gull expressed skepticism that Allen’s trial would be on track for March 23, citing the “extraordinary, voluminous evidence” in the case that must be turned over to the defense.”

“Gull said she’ll hear arguments during the bail hearing [Feb. 17] on whether the trial can proceed as scheduled on March 23, although there are “thousands upon thousands” of pages of discovery for the state to turn over to Allen’s defense lawyers.”

“Gull also noted that the state has been “diligent” in turning over material to Allen’s lawyers.”

THANK YOU. The state is absolutely not withholding evidence.

 

[Laughing]

Gotcha. I'll see you in the dining hall!

bug spray & sun screen at the ready, here.

 

[Prime8]

I read this to mean that they were going to turn over all evidence, but weren’t going to formulate and hand the defense strategy over on a silver platter; the prosecution will deliver the facts and evidence only, and won’t go to the trouble to point out that which is potentially exculpatory. MOO

I was answering the previous question of handing over discovery, "While prosecution may be obligated to turn over discovery, what if they don't? The defense wouldn't know if they had anything, would they? How does the sealing of documents work? Who gets to see those docs; I know the public does not." Not speculating on the anything that happened this week in the courts.

 

[TTF14]

I was answering the previous question of handing over discovery, "While prosecution may be obligated to turn over discovery, what if they don't? The defense wouldn't know if they had anything, would they? How does the sealing of documents work? Who gets to see those docs; I know the public does not." Not speculating on the anything that happened this week in the courts.

I think that would just cause a lot of objections and sidebars and discussions outside of the presence of the jury during the trial.

But I'm not a lawyer....just have watched a lot of trials.

 

[TTF14]

Question wasn’t to me, but I’d like to share my thoughts.

RA was “pre-splaining“. He knew he’d been seen by the three young witnesses. He gave a premeditated alibi of being on the bridge to watch fish. This is where he began to hide in plain sight.

It was a shrewd and strategic move by RA.
Hallmark of a skilled manipulator.

jmo

He's not the only one who has been doing "pre-splaining" over the last 5 years.

 

[Gemmie]

He's not the only one who has been doing "pre-splaining" over the last 5 years.

What do you mean by this? Can you elaborate on your thoughts?

 

[getthefax]

I was answering the previous question of handing over discovery, "While prosecution may be obligated to turn over discovery, what if they don't? The defense wouldn't know if they had anything, would they? How does the sealing of documents work? Who gets to see those docs; I know the public does not." Not speculating on the anything that happened this week in the courts.

Ah, I see. Well, that’s a violation of legal fair play and could result in a mistrial or case dismissal etc.

I can’t think of any reason to conclude these prosecutors would be dumb enough to risk that kind of stuff. The judge hs already said the prosecution has been diligent in sharing evidence; what more can they do?

 

[phantomstrider]

Question wasn’t to me, but I’d like to share my thoughts.

RA was “pre-splaining“. He knew he’d been seen by the three young witnesses. He gave a premeditated alibi of being on the bridge to watch fish. This is where he began to hide in plain sight.

It was a shrewd and strategic move by RA.
Hallmark of a skilled manipulator.

jmo

Nope imo it would be pretty dumb if you did it to put yourself on the bridge as that would make you a very like suspect

 

[phantomstrider]

Question wasn’t to me, but I’d like to share my thoughts.

RA was “pre-splaining“. He knew he’d been seen by the three young witnesses. He gave a premeditated alibi of being on the bridge to watch fish. This is where he began to hide in plain sight.

It was a shrewd and strategic move by RA.
Hallmark of a skilled manipulator.

jmo

Plus he had to know saying that would make him more likely to get caught instead of just saying quiet while the girls allegedly saw him they wouldn’t be able to say it was him for sure as a lot of men look like bridge guy.