Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #176

[Betty P]

She has the same access any of us have as far as I know. She's not posting any documents that aren't publicly accessible.

Thanks, but that's not what I'm reading in the comments here. Is it another social media crime maven they're referring to?

 

[AugustWest]

Thanks, but that's not what I'm reading in the comments here. Is it another social media crime maven they're referring to?

I don't pay any attention to youtubers/podcasters/true crimers. She is Richard Allen's appellate attorney, but I haven't seen her post anything that isn't public record.

ETA: by "appellate attorney." I am referring to the SCION action regarding reinstatement of Allen's counsel as attorneys of record

 

[AugustWest]

DBM

 

[Betty P]

Cara Wieneke is RA's appellate attorney (prepared SCOIN filings).

At one time Cara W entered her appearance in Gull's court for the RA matter in order to get access to the docs she needed to prepare her SCOIN filings. IIRC, she withdrew when her business there was completed. Obviously RA's appellate team (incl Cara W) continue to follow the docket as filings are made available to the public ...

So now she's putting sealed case documents on social media? I assume she will be sanctioned by the judge for violating a gag order, correct? Is she trolling the judge? Working to get the case thrown out before the trial begins? I've never seen anything like this.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

In the States Motion to Withdraw motion for leave of court to subpoena for third party records it states that defense did not file ex parte motions under seal. State has had access to several ex parte motions because they were not filed correctly and any party on the case had access. State was not denied access and believed the document was filed publicly. If Defense had wanted it sealed or state to not have access, it should have filed it properly.
So someone called it. It’s the defenses fault.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Occam has sliced up everyone here at some point or other. I'm a big fan but there are exceptions.

I agree there is evidence that BG had (showed, etc) a gun. In an ordinary case the fact that the authorities say they believe BG had a gun would constitute enough of a preponderance for me. Not with this case.

Speaking of the unfired cartridge, (and my mistrust of these same authorities) I understand it was found in the soil, several days after the crime scene had been released. If that's true there would be very little evidentiary value to the cartridge, IMHO

I do like your leprechaun theory, though!

Please link where it is cited bullet at crime scene was found several days after crime scene was released?
If this were true it would have been on page one of the franks memorandum. IMO

 

[TL4S]

My personal interpretation of NMcL's argument in his withdrawal:

If a teacher or other staff member unwittingly leaves an answer key out on a desk, and a student uses it to cheat on a test, the student shouldn't get in trouble for cheating, even though they knew it was against the rules, because it was the teacher's fault for leaving it out.

 

[layer]

Please link where it is cited bullet at crime scene was found several days after crime scene was released?
If this were true it would have been on page one of the franks memorandum. IMO

I was very careful in my wording. Obviously something stated on Court TV is not a fact to be cited, which is why I didn't present it as a fact.

Eta: Source (Where I got this understanding)

 

[Emma Peel]

So now she's putting sealed case documents on social media? I assume she will be sanctioned by the judge for violating a gag order, correct? Is she trolling the judge? Working to get the case thrown out before the trial begins? I've never seen anything like this.

For sure, the events are things we never see anything like - as you note.

Yet several of these rare things have occurred under Gull's oversight - and have drawn the attention of intervening appellate counsel/advocates.

As RA's appellate counsel Cara W is not subject to Gull's oversight or any gag order (or sanctions).
IMO it's safe to assume Cara W closely follows RA's case(s) under Gull and continues to offer appellate services to RA.
It's RA's Defense team that are working to get the case thrown out (see motion to dismiss) before trial begins.
It's RA's Appellate team that would intervene as necessary if the lower Court process and/or decisions were a hot mess requiring higher court intervention. (And, note that they've already done this - which is how RA made it to the SCOIN.)

I think it's safe to assume Cara W doesn't post sealed docs on her twitter. She has, however, forced sealed docs to be unsealed through the formal Writ process at SCOIN. Through that vehicle, it could be argued that Cara made sealed docs available to the public ... just through another avenue: the RA vs Gull docket for the 1st and 2nd Writs Cara filed with the SCOIN. And Cara has linked those SCOIN filings (which are public) on her twitter after they made the SCOIN docket. (The same filings being published by the press at the same time.)

It goes without saying that a lower court can't sanction an appellate attorney for appealing to a higher court for a review the lower court's decisions/process, etc..

jmho

 

[girlhasnoname]

Thanks, but that's not what I'm reading in the comments here. Is it another social media crime maven they're referring to?

CW was RA 's appellate co counsel for the SCOIN oral arguments. She has steadily tweeted about the case from the moment she came on board and is still going strong. They all want their 15 minutes of fame IMO. This isn't true journalism IMO, it's clicks and likes for notoriety.

So many Defense attorneys have jumped on the SM band wagon to argue the case in defense of RA. I don't know if it is the same for those who believe the State has the right man. I don't follow any of them, I only see what gets posted here.

I take what all of them say with a pound of salt, I'll stick with MSM articles personally. A lot more believable and much less conspiratorial in that reporting than FB, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter/X, etc.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

In the States Motion to Withdraw motion for leave of court to subpoena for third party records it states that defense did not file ex parte motions under seal. State has had access to several ex parte motions because they were not filed correctly and any party on the case had access. State was not denied access and believed the document was filed publicly. If Defense had wanted it sealed or state to not have access, it should have filed it properly.
So someone called it. It’s the defenses fault.

Why does this not surprise me in the least? A reasonable explanation verses some deep conspiracy against the defense.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

So now she's putting sealed case documents on social media? I assume she will be sanctioned by the judge for violating a gag order, correct? Is she trolling the judge? Working to get the case thrown out before the trial begins? I've never seen anything like this.

This case has brought many firsts for sure and not in a good way.

#Justice4Abby&Libby

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Why does this not surprise me in the least? A reasonable explanation verses some deep conspiracy against the defense.

JMO

Agree wholeheartedly.
I do believe NMcL should have sought legal advice after he received notice of the ex parte filing on 2/26. He did sit on his hands for a bit, which I am sure was hard. Ultimately he shouldn’t have seen it and should have conducted himself accordingly.

 

[Betty P]

CW was RA 's appellate co counsel for the SCOIN oral arguments. She has steadily tweeted about the case from the moment she came on board and is still going strong. They all want their 15 minutes of fame IMO. This isn't true journalism IMO, it's clicks and likes for notoriety.

So many Defense attorneys have jumped on the SM band wagon to argue the case in defense of RA. I don't know if it is the same for those who believe the State has the right man. I don't follow any of them, I only see what gets posted here.

I take what all of them say with a pound of salt, I'll stick with MSM articles personally. A lot more believable and much less conspiratorial in that reporting than FB, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter/X, etc.

JMO

Agree, I only follow what's on MSM and available on the public docket, etc.

I've seen quite a few cases where doctored /fraudulent documents and photos have been posted on social media. Also rumors of a pending arrest that even made it to a local MSM daily newspaper, later found to be a hoax. Arrest didn't happen for another year. I used to read one site for entertainment value because some of the posters were suspected killers. Later, in trial, it was revealed they were posting there. The state bureau of investigation was also watching there and posting, too, IIRC.

The judge should stop this pronto.

 

[AugustWest]

Agree, I only follow what's on MSM and available on the public docket, etc.

I've seen quite a few cases where doctored /fraudulent documents and photos have been posted on social media. Also rumors of a pending arrest that even made it to a local MSM daily newspaper, later found to be a hoax. Arrest didn't happen for another year. I used to read one site for entertainment value because some of the posters were suspected killers. Later, in trial, it was revealed they were posting there. The state bureau of investigation was also watching there and posting, too, IIRC.

The judge should stop this pronto.

@Betty P

Respectfully, what exactly is it that you wish the judge should stop pronto? You have said yourself that you have no idea what it is Ms. Wienecke is posting on social media, so why the consternation at her content? Myself and others here have indicated she has simply posted images of date-stamped and public court documents. Wienecke seems to be as confused about the procedure of this Judge and court as we all are, so I see no reason for the animus towards her.

We want transparency in our judicial system, but not this transparency? What gives? I really am curious.

For the record, I only read her SM since she has represented Allen on the SCION issue. I would read McLelland's SM also if he had such and it offered insight into pertinent issues. Did it for Creighton Waters (Prosecutor) and Jim Griffin (Defense) in Murdaugh's trial too. It matters not which side they are on, and I respect both P and D here also. It's not an "Us v. Them" issue for me, simply a justice issue.

 

[Betty P]

@Betty P

Respectfully, what exactly is it that you wish the judge should stop pronto? You have said yourself that you have no idea what it is Ms. Wienecke is posting on social media, so why the consternation at her content? Myself and others here have indicated she has simply posted images of date-stamped and public court documents. Wienecke seems to be as confused about the procedure of this Judge and court as we all are, so I see no reason for the animus towards her.

We want transparency in our judicial system, but not this transparency? What gives? I really am curious.

For the record, I only read her SM since she has represented Allen on the SCION issue. I would read McLelland's SM also if he had such and it offered insight into pertinent issues. Did it for Creighton Waters (Prosecutor) and Jim Griffin (Defense) in Murdaugh's trial too. It matters not which side they are on, and I respect both P and D here also. It's not an "Us v. Them" issue for me, simply a justice issue.

If she is leaking information on her social media from files that are sealed, the judge should take some action. I realize Indiana may be lax with lawbreakers, but they could at least give her a warning.


I learned more about her activities from another post here at WS. I don't follow FB, Twitter, YouTube, etc. when following crimes and trials. It's seldom accurate. When there is factual information, its usually nothing more than you would find in the news media or other legitimate sources.

OTOH, if a prosecutor decides to write a book or article after a trial, I've read many of those.

 

[AugustWest]

If she is leaking information on her social media from files that are sealed, the judge should take some action. I realize Indiana may be lax with lawbreakers, but they could at least give her a warning.


I learned more about her activities from another post here at WS. I don't follow FB, Twitter, YouTube, etc. when following crimes and trials. It's seldom accurate. When there is factual information, its usually nothing more than you would find in the news media or other legitimate sources.

OTOH, if a prosecutor decides to write a book or article after a trial, I would read that.

Fair enough, and thank you for the reply @Betty P

 

[WildHuncher]

Please link where it is cited bullet at crime scene was found several days after crime scene was released?
If this were true it would have been on page one of the franks memorandum. IMO

That’s yet another one of those “There’s no evidence for it but prove me wrong” things.

 

[Emma Peel]

In the States Motion to Withdraw motion for leave of court to subpoena for third party records it states that defense did not file ex parte motions under seal. State has had access to several ex parte motions because they were not filed correctly and any party on the case had access. State was not denied access and believed the document was filed publicly. If Defense had wanted it sealed or state to not have access, it should have filed it properly.
So someone called it. It’s the defenses fault.

Very briefly - even if these was a defense filing error ... there's ethical obligations upon the error-discovering prosecution.

When one side takes advantage of obvious error - the ethical burden is on the side that could capitalize on the error - and they must NOT take advantage of the error. In fact, they have the burden to notify the other side of their error.

These are basic ethical conduct obligations of officers of the Court and members of the bar.

If the defense here did in fact make an error - that's an error and they are responsible for that error.

But if the prosecution does not notify the defense of the error and/or knowingly capitalizes on that error - that's a much bigger problem. And making such unethical moves - is sanctionable.

The seriousness of this matter is underscored by today's abrupt withdrawal by the prosecution of yesterday's motion, the brief explanations noted by the prosecution.

IMO, it's safe to assume the D formally called P's foul and/or possibly an error of their own (still unkown if there was error?) yesterday - under seal.

JMHO

 

[M. Kay]

I've always thought RA had specific knowledge that Abby & Libby would be at the bridge at that time that day. RA arriving minutes before them, carrying a gun/knife and who knows what else in his fanny pack, walking with a purpose, head down, heading to the Monan High Bridge is just too coincidental for me.

I'm completely in agreement. I expect light will/would be shed in trial, so would rather RA plead and spare the families further grief.