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

[raja]

Just saw on the news we are waiting to hear what county will be chosen for jurors. They will let us know as soon as they know

 

[FrostedGlass]

FOX59 News Retweeted



Max Lewis
@MaxLewisTV·
14m

#UPDATE: A spokesperson for Judge Fran Gull, who is overseeing the Delphi murder case, said the judge did not hear from the attorneys about a possible county for jury selection. They were supposed to let her know their county of choice by the end of the day. #DELPHI

 

[Boxer]

Us

The defense imo could contest a lot of that evidence including the muddy bloody witness and the gun cartridge. They need something more direct like dna or fingerprints that puts him at the crime scene. The case against Richard Allen is purely circumstantial and isn’t as strong the case against Brian Kohberger for example.

They will contest, but it’s a strong case.
Is it reasonable to believe an identical man popped out of the woods, as RA left the bridge, and coincidentally RA lied about not seeing the girls on the trail that he could not miss seeing as they were on the way to the bridge from the Mears lot. The witness saw them already walking to the bridge.
By RAs own account he left platform 1 and walked back down the trail to sit on a bench and did not see them.

Their phone must have been tracked and by his account he had a phone so I believe they have been able to get pinging location records by now for RA.
If it has been too long, then the police totally blew the case.

 

[phantomstrider]

They will contest, but it’s a strong case.
Is it reasonable to believe an identical man popped out of the woods, as RA left the bridge, and coincidentally RA lied about not seeing the girls on the trail that he could not miss seeing as they were on the way to the bridge from the Mears lot. The witness saw them already walking to the bridge.
By RAs own account he left platform 1 and walked back down the trail to sit on a bench and did not see them.

Their phone must have been tracked and by his account he had a phone so I believe they have been able to get pinging location records by now for RA.
If it has been too long, then the police totally blew the case.

It’s not as strong as the case against brian Kohberger or brian Walshe based on what we know so far imo without dna fingerprints or cell phone tracking it won’t be easy to convict him.

 

[Arkay]

You make an excellent point. He had to have seen the news when the photo from Libby’s phone was released, and the request by LE to talk to the man on the bridge. Even if he spoke to the CO right after the murders, why he didn’t come forward again to say ”hey, that was me on the bridge, how can I help?“ An innocent man would have.

Why did he not?
Is his defense going to say it’s not him in the BG pic?

I completely agree.

I believe that, as you say, if RA were innocently on the same bridge at the same time as a murder was occurring, he would know he was in a position to give police everything he could recall about his “near miss” with this supposed other guy.

Speaking only for myself, if this happened to me, not only would I race to the police with everything I could remember, but I would ALSO still be talking about it to all
my family and friends. Enough that it would be annoying, probably!

Again IMO, I think that most innocent people who had a hair’s-breadth miss with an actively happening murder, one which received national publicity, would be bending everyone’s ear about “did you know I was RIGHT THERE? It could’ve been me!”

His lack of doing so is very suspicious, again IMO.

 

[mrjitty]

Speaking only for myself, if this happened to me, not only would I race to the police with everything I could remember, but I would ALSO still be talking about it to all
my family and friends. Enough that it would be annoying, probably!

RSBM

Exactly - this is a much discussed case. I am really interested what he might have said about it down the years. Like the fact that he was so close to it physically and temporally - wouldn't you talk about that? According to his story, he was on the Bridge just before or just after the abduction ....

 

[gizmobtj]

Three thoughts:

1. Some people are suggesting that the fact that no witnesses saw anyone who fit the description of Bridge Guy other than RA is an absence of evidence that strongly implicates RA. That is predicated on a belief the law enforcement did a thorough investigation and canvas. We know they (1) let the scene get trampled (Delphi community comes together after tragedy), (2) we know they lost at least one interview (‘Clerical error’ may have led police to overlook Richard Allen in Delphi case, source claims) and (3) hundreds of people searched through the night and police are telling us 'nada' one of them looked like Bridge Guy (Police confirm bodies found near Delphi are missing teens, searching for suspect) but I suspect the defense will find several.

2 The police say the PT Cruiser, the Black Sedan and the Smart Car are believed to be the same cars (http://bit.ly/3WuMhl3) just like Doug Carter is suggesting the first sketch and the Young Bridge Guy sketch are the same (Indiana police explain why there are 2 different sketches in Delphi murders case). Do you buy it? Is anyone on a jury going to buy it?

Which brings me to my own firm conclusion that there could have been two, three, four or more people missed in the case file, and any one of them could be an accomplice.

Outside the really exquisite evidence given by the prosecutor by actually saying he believes others are involved. He actually said they “have a good reason to believe” Allen is not the only person connected to the killings. Not that they think. Not that they have a hunch (Judge weighs whether to unseal records in teens' killings)

All of which leads me to 3:

3. People say it isn't odd to charge felony murder when someone committed a murder, but why would you select a charge where you have to prove seven elements of a crime as opposed to straight murder where you have to prove just four?

Straight murder:

1. The Defendant;
2. Knowingly or intentionall (i.e. with malice);
3. Killed and
4. It was the victim

Felony murder (kidnapping):

1. The Defendant;
2. Contributed to the death;
3. Of the victim;
4. Because the Defendant;
5. Knowingly or intentionally removed or attempted to remove the victim;
6. By force or threat of force and
7. From one place to another

2017 Indiana Code :: TITLE 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: ARTICLE 42. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON :: CHAPTER 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

Whhhy would you do that? Because you don't believe you have the probable cause or evidence that the defendant killed the victim.

The preponderance of the evidence, in this humble mind of mine, is that there is someone, if not multiple someone's, also involved

 

[TTF14]

Three thoughts:

1. Some people are suggesting that the fact that no witnesses saw anyone who fit the description of Bridge Guy other than RA is an absence of evidence that strongly implicates RA. That is predicated on a belief the law enforcement did a thorough investigation and canvas. We know they (1) let the scene get trampled (Delphi community comes together after tragedy), (2) we know they lost at least one interview (‘Clerical error’ may have led police to overlook Richard Allen in Delphi case, source claims) and (3) hundreds of people searched through the night and police are telling us 'nada' one of them looked like Bridge Guy (Police confirm bodies found near Delphi are missing teens, searching for suspect) but I suspect the defense will find several.

2 The police say the PT Cruiser, the Black Sedan and the Smart Car are believed to be the same cars (http://bit.ly/3WuMhl3) just like Doug Carter is suggesting the first sketch and the Young Bridge Guy sketch are the same (Indiana police explain why there are 2 different sketches in Delphi murders case). Do you buy it? Is anyone on a jury going to buy it?

Which brings me to my own firm conclusion that there could have been two, three, four or more people missed in the case file, and any one of them could be an accomplice.

Outside the really exquisite evidence giving my the prosecutor by actually saying he believes others are involved. He actually said they “have a good reason to believe” Allen is not the only person connected to the killings. Not that they think. Not that they have a hunch (Judge weighs whether to unseal records in teens' killings)

All of which leads me to 3:

3. People say it isn't odd to charge felony murder when someone committed a murder, but why would you select a charge where you have to prove seven elements of a crime as opposed to straight murder where you have to prove just four?

Straight murder:

1. The Defendant;
2. Knowingly or intentionall (i.e. with malice);
3. Killed and
4. It was the victim

Felony murder (kidnapping):

1. The Defendant;
2. Contributed to the death;
3. Of the victim;
4. Because the Defendant;
5. Knowingly or intentionally removed or attempted to remove the victim;
6. By force or threat of force and
7. From one place to another

2017 Indiana Code :: TITLE 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: ARTICLE 42. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON :: CHAPTER 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

Whhhy would you do that? Because you don't believe you have the probable cause or evidence that the defendant killed the victim.

The preponderance of the evidence, in this humble mind of mine, is that there is someone, if not multiple someone's, also involvdd

EXCELLENT POST!!

 

[MistyWaters]

Three thoughts:

1. Some people are suggesting that the fact that no witnesses saw anyone who fit the description of Bridge Guy other than RA is an absence of evidence that strongly implicates RA. That is predicated on a belief the law enforcement did a thorough investigation and canvas. We know they (1) let the scene get trampled (Delphi community comes together after tragedy), (2) we know they lost at least one interview (‘Clerical error’ may have led police to overlook Richard Allen in Delphi case, source claims) and (3) hundreds of people searched through the night and police are telling us 'nada' one of them looked like Bridge Guy (Police confirm bodies found near Delphi are missing teens, searching for suspect) but I suspect the defense will find several.

2 The police say the PT Cruiser, the Black Sedan and the Smart Car are believed to be the same cars (http://bit.ly/3WuMhl3) just like Doug Carter is suggesting the first sketch and the Young Bridge Guy sketch are the same (Indiana police explain why there are 2 different sketches in Delphi murders case). Do you buy it? Is anyone on a jury going to buy it?

Which brings me to my own firm conclusion that there could have been two, three, four or more people missed in the case file, and any one of them could be an accomplice.

Outside the really exquisite evidence given by the prosecutor by actually saying he believes others are involved. He actually said they “have a good reason to believe” Allen is not the only person connected to the killings. Not that they think. Not that they have a hunch (Judge weighs whether to unseal records in teens' killings)

All of which leads me to 3:

3. People say it isn't odd to charge felony murder when someone committed a murder, but why would you select a charge where you have to prove seven elements of a crime as opposed to straight murder where you have to prove just four?

Straight murder:

1. The Defendant;
2. Knowingly or intentionall (i.e. with malice);
3. Killed and
4. It was the victim

Felony murder (kidnapping):

1. The Defendant;
2. Contributed to the death;
3. Of the victim;
4. Because the Defendant;
5. Knowingly or intentionally removed or attempted to remove the victim;
6. By force or threat of force and
7. From one place to another

2017 Indiana Code :: TITLE 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: ARTICLE 42. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON :: CHAPTER 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

Whhhy would you do that? Because you don't believe you have the probable cause or evidence that the defendant killed the victim.

The preponderance of the evidence, in this humble mind of mine, is that there is someone, if not multiple someone's, also involved

What you didn’t include is from your link there is another link directing one to a newer version of section 35-42-1-2. So I don’t believe there is evidence of another defendant killing the victims or RA wouldn’t have been charged under this code.

BBM

2021 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

2) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit arson, burglary, child molesting, consumer product tampering, criminal deviate conduct (under IC 35-42-4-2 before its repeal), kidnapping, rape, robbery, human trafficking, promotion of human labor trafficking, promotion of human sexual trafficking, promotion of child sexual trafficking, promotion of sexual trafficking of a younger child, child sexual trafficking, or carjacking (before its repeal);

 

[gizmobtj]

What you didn’t include is from your link there is another link directing one to a newer version of section 35-42-1-2. So I don’t believe there is evidence of another defendant killing the victims or RA wouldn’t have been charged under this code.

BBM

2021 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

2) kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit arson, burglary, child molesting, consumer product tampering, criminal deviate conduct (under IC 35-42-4-2 before its repeal), kidnapping, rape, robbery, human trafficking, promotion of human labor trafficking, promotion of human sexual trafficking, promotion of child sexual trafficking, promotion of sexual trafficking of a younger child, child sexual trafficking, or carjacking (before its repeal);

I also don't believe there needs to be another person who killed them for RA to be charged with felony murder. I am asking "why would you" charge someone with a crime that's harder to prove than one that is easier to prove if you had evidence of the killing.

The 2017 and 2021 appear identical on this point.

 

[MistyWaters]

I also don't believe there needs to be another person who killed them for RA to be charged with felony murder. I am asking "why would you" charge someone with a crime that's harder to prove than one that is easier to prove if you had evidence of the killing.

The 2017 and 2021 appear identical on this point.

I think what he was charged with appropriately fits the circumstances considering the girls were forced off the bridge DTH to an area where the murders occurred. Had the abduction not occurred, they would’ve safely continued on their way over the bridge making their way to the location where Libby’s dad intended to pick them up.

 

[TL4S]

One of the recent MS episodes was with the Hoosier Public Defender. He talked about these charges and why he was surprised by them. He said something along the lines (I'm going by memory) at how IN murder one charges can have aggravating factors added, and kidnapping is one of them. I'm sorry I can't go into more detail about what he said right now, but it was an interesting conversation.

The Delphi Murders: A Conversation with the Hoosier Public Defender

 

[gizmobtj]

I think what he was charged with appropriately fits the circumstances considering the girls were forced off the bridge DTH to an area where the murders occurred. Had the abduction not occurred, they would’ve safely continued on their way over the bridge making their way to the location where Libby’s dad intended to pick them up.

Fair. Let me give you an alternative charging approach.

Charge him with straight murder and kidnapping. Then, you only have to prove four elements for murder and four kidnapping. If you don't prove one element you can still get a conviction on the other charges.

You got multiple counts of kidnapping, with an agitating factor of Abby being under 14 and having a deadly weopon.

Indiana Kidnapping Laws - FindLaw

FindLaw's article on Indiana Kidnapping Laws. For more information on this and related topics, see FindLaw's section on Indiana Kidnapping Laws.

www.findlaw.com

The point is -- what they are doing makes no sense unless we are missing a significant piece of information

 

[FrostedGlass]

I need "Charging Murder Cases for Dummies."

Or someone could just ask McL what his reasoning but I'm pretty sure he'd say it's investigation material, sorry.

 

[MistyWaters]

Fair. Let me give you an alternative charging approach.

Charge him with straight murder and kidnapping. Then, you only have to prove four elements for murder and four kidnapping. If you don't prove one element you can still get a conviction on the other charges.

You got multiple counts of kidnapping, with an agitating factor of Abby being under 14 and having a deadly weopon.

Indiana Kidnapping Laws - FindLaw

FindLaw's article on Indiana Kidnapping Laws. For more information on this and related topics, see FindLaw's section on Indiana Kidnapping Laws.

www.findlaw.com

The point is -- what they are doing makes no sense unless we are missing a significant piece of information

I agree, we‘re not privy to everything LE knows. But I think the code RA was charged under will be the simplest to prosecute because the video and audio supports a abduction/kidnapping, which preceded the murder. Did RA initially have intent to murder, I don’t know how that could be proven so if he was charged only with murder what happens if a conviction is reduced to manslaughter? If the element of kidnapping is overlooked, his defence can argue no intent to murder, he planned at most a SA but the girls didn’t co-operate or something occurred to make him angry. I don’t think a prosecution would want to risk that given it’s known there‘s video evidence of an illegal act ie kidnapping. JMO

 

[mrjitty]

Whhhy would you do that?

RSBM

Because they have the abduction on video - so the only real issue at trial will be the identity of BG

IMO it will be accepted by the defence, and inferred by the jury, that Bridge Guy did the abduction and was directly involved in the murders because he took the victims towards the crime scene. None of that will be contested IMO because it is on video. The only question is who is Bridge Guy.

02c

 

[steeltowngirl]

Regardless of which underlying offense is at play, the murder charges — as they are currently listed under Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(2) — will require prosecutors to prove as follows: (1) that the named defendant (2) killed (3) each specific victim (4) while “committing or attempting to commit” the underlying offense.

And that might be easier, depending on the facts of the case. It appears from the statutes themselves and from the model jury instructions that prosecutors will not have to dance around proving a lack of “sudden heat” (should the lesser-included offense come into the equation). Nor will prosecutors have to negotiate the minefield of proving that the deaths themselves were knowing or intentional.

Generally speaking, statues such as the one cited in Allen’s docket require prosecutors only to prove that deaths occurred during the commission of an underlying offense — even unintentionally. Again, depending on the facts of the case, that burden can oftentimes be easier for the state to carry.

Delphi Suspect Richard Allen Faces Murder Charges with Underlying Offenses, New Court Records Indicate

The suspect in the Delphi Murders is accused of a specific subsection of Indiana's murder statute which involves at least one underlying offense.

lawandcrime.com

 

[getthefax]

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

EBM for clarity.

What reason do you have? It was dumb of him to put himself on the bridge—but what other choice did he have, once he realized someone filmed? When the hunt for the killer began and RA found out there was video, he HAD to fess up to having been there because he knew he had been seen there and feared being identified. He was a local. He was def “pre-splaining” (thanks, @steeltowngirl !) so he could relax thinking the cops (and probably anyone else who knew he was there that day) had cleared him.

What I really want to know is whether he told any of his friends or family he would be at the MHBT that day, before he went there. That would tell us a lot about his intentions for the day (and will also tell us a lot about how his family feels about him now, if this is allllll news to them). My guess is he didn’t, and instead didn’t tell anyone until he got busted that he’d been there and been cleared. All MOO/speculation/YMMV.

All MOO.

 

[mrjitty]

Regardless of which underlying offense is at play, the murder charges — as they are currently listed under Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(2) — will require prosecutors to prove as follows: (1) that the named defendant (2) killed (3) each specific victim (4) while “committing or attempting to commit” the underlying offense.

And that might be easier, depending on the facts of the case. It appears from the statutes themselves and from the model jury instructions that prosecutors will not have to dance around proving a lack of “sudden heat” (should the lesser-included offense come into the equation). Nor will prosecutors have to negotiate the minefield of proving that the deaths themselves were knowing or intentional.

Generally speaking, statues such as the one cited in Allen’s docket require prosecutors only to prove that deaths occurred during the commission of an underlying offense — even unintentionally. Again, depending on the facts of the case, that burden can oftentimes be easier for the state to carry.

Delphi Suspect Richard Allen Faces Murder Charges with Underlying Offenses, New Court Records Indicate

The suspect in the Delphi Murders is accused of a specific subsection of Indiana's murder statute which involves at least one underlying offense.

lawandcrime.com

Exactly. These codifications simply make the prosecutors job a bit easier compared to the common law position

Especially it makes life hard for an accused who gets involved in serious felonies like an abduction, you then become liable for the bad stuff that might happen, for policy reasons.

Especially this makes it hard for the defence to claim maybe there was some other guy who did all the really bad stuff.

 

[JosieMae]

EBM for clarity.

What reason do you have? It was dumb of him to put himself on the bridge—but what other choice did he have, once he realized someone filmed? When the hunt for the killer began and RA found out there was video, he HAD to fess up to having been there because he knew he had been seen there and feared being identified. He was a local. He was def “pre-splaining” (thanks, @steeltowngirl !) so he could relax thinking the cops (and probably anyone else who knew he was there that day) had cleared him.

What I really want to know is whether he told any of his friends or family he would be at the MHBT that day, before he went there. That would tell us a lot about his intentions for the day (and will also tell us a lot about how his family feels about him now, if this is allllll news to them). My guess is he didn’t, and instead didn’t tell anyone until he got busted that he’d been there and been cleared. All MOO/speculation/YMMV.

All MOO.

I believe RA spoke to the CO before the video was released to the public.