Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #177

[Oculus]

Having just followed a case through to trial and conviction. I was reminded how limited LE can be. They can't search, seize, spray luminol, arrest without probable cause. And even then, they are hampered by restrictions. The law, budgets, etc.

They don't fingerprint every surface, they don't spray luminol on every surface, they don't collect every item.

Plus every investigation takes time. Things that seemed insignificant can later become critical, sadly after cctv videos are overwritten, other evidence concealed or destroyed. Crime scenes don't stay locked down, bodies are returned to families, tips can be missed.

Investigations aren't static. They don't collect or test every leaf. It is imperfect.

We just pray it's enough. Enough to convict the accused.

JMO

They can't spray Luminol without probable cause or warrant? Sounds outrageous.

 

[Oculus]

Luminol is used to detect the presence of blood, it doesn't find all sources of DNA.

Normally the presence of blood is detected at a crime scene by close visual examination and then presumptive testing to make sure it really is blood is done before samples/swabs are collected for lab analysis. The scene is photographed extensively with evidence markers in situ so that there is documentation of exactly where samples came from.

Typically Luminol would be used to find blood that was not visible due to being in such small amounts that it can't be seen by the naked eye, or having already been subjected to cleanup attempts. I don't think that the crime scene in Delphi would likely have a miniscule amount of blood based on court documents that we know about so far; nor do I think it's really possible for clean up to have occurred based on the outdoor nature of the crime scene. I do think luminol could possibly have been used to detect/map a route of exit from the crime scene, document drag marks, something along those lines.

For example, the markings on the tree that appear to have been made in blood. You don't need to luminol those because visually, you see that blood is there. Swabs can be taken from the markings that are visible.

@Megnut is absolutely correct that not every swab or sample is tested. Some end up being unsuitable and others are redundant. The detectives and the lab make these decisions in concert with each other based on known information at the time. It's an imperfect process.

All of this is IMO.

Thanks.

Yes, I am aware of the use of Luminol. My thought is that it would be of great interest to collect any blood available at any crime scene. And any other sources of DNA as well, obviously.

 

[Gardenista]

They can't spray Luminol without probable cause or warrant? Sounds outrageous.

Yup. And they would have to get a warrant for Ron Logan's property to work the scene, even if he gave consent.

 

[Megnut]

They can't spray Luminol without probable cause or warrant? Sounds outrageous.

LE has to secure/seize a crime scene first. I imagine the first step is a warrant.

So it's not a warrant specifically for luminol, I should think, but to take possession of the thing they intend to soray/swab/test, they need a warrant for that.

JMO

 

[Yemelyan]

Thanks.

Yes, I am aware of the use of Luminol. My thought is that it would be of great interest to collect any blood available at any crime scene. And any other sources of DNA as well, obviously.

You asked what the standard practice for DNA collection at a crime scene is, and I answered. They start with visual examination, then documentation through use of markers/photography, then presumptive testing, then collection of swabs. Certain tests look for blood, other specific tests look for saliva or seminal fluid. It always starts with close visual examination. Not all swabs will ultimately be tested and we're usually not privy to those decisions until trial if ever.

If you are already aware that Luminol is used to find occult sources of blood specifically, then I'm not sure what you were really asking. Happy to share what I know, if I know anything that pertains (which I may not).

 

[FrostedGlass]

You asked what the standard practice for DNA collection at a crime scene is, and I answered. They start with visual examination, then documentation through use of markers/photography, then presumptive testing, then collection of swabs. Certain tests look for blood, other specific tests look for saliva or seminal fluid. It always starts with close visual examination. Not all swabs will ultimately be tested and we're usually not privy to those decisions until trial if ever.

If you are already aware that Luminol is used to find occult sources of blood specifically, then I'm not sure what you were really asking. Happy to share what I know, if I know anything that pertains (which I may not).

Thank you so much for your informative (as always) answers.
Would Luminol have been able to detect blood stains on years-old, washed-many-times clothing?

 

[girlhasnoname]

This remains my beef with Hennessy and especially his own 'you tube' appearance

It was Hennessy who got up in court and then on the pro defence you tube to essentially claim that AB was the victim of an old friend who snuck in a stole the photos.

Only later did we find out MW is a 'consultant' who had been sent the Franks and heaven knows what parts of the discovery. So in what way was MW a consultant? Was he being paid to work on the case?

They've been deceptive all along, which is why i would love to read AB's police statement.

DH's original sworn statement to the court was that Baldwin was taken advantage of and snookered by a friend who took those photos without any of his knowledge. Now they're saying he was a consultant?

How could anyone ever reconcile those two statements without one being a complete lie? You can't.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

If i had to put money on it, my hunch is MWs 'consultancy' was not to leak discovery, but to advise on how to create/tap into the social media narratives that might help the defence. Perhaps in that role, he went too far in establishing his bonafides

But nevertheless the defence has been very successful at this, and have since realised that they can directly use surrogates like BM to communicate "their thinking", above and beyond the messaging motions.

Maybe this is just how the cool kids will roll on these high profile cases, if the judge won't let them chat to the media directly.

I believe this strategy has done the complete opposite for the Defense. They, and the SM trolls haven't raised good questions or realistic followings, they've made complete fools of themselves.

The D gambled on trying this case in SM because they couldn't get their narrative out to the public any other way with the gag order in place. Sneaky and underhanded, not 'cool kids' comes to my mind.

JMO

 

[Oculus]

You asked what the standard practice for DNA collection at a crime scene is, and I answered. They start with visual examination, then documentation through use of markers/photography, then presumptive testing, then collection of swabs. Certain tests look for blood, other specific tests look for saliva or seminal fluid. It always starts with close visual examination. Not all swabs will ultimately be tested and we're usually not privy to those decisions until trial if ever.

If you are already aware that Luminol is used to find occult sources of blood specifically, then I'm not sure what you were really asking. Happy to share what I know, if I know anything that pertains (which I may not).

And I thanked you for your reply. Part of my question was if Luminol was used as part of search of DNA evidence on an outdoor scene. And your reply was informative.

But I didn't know that a warrant was needed to do this on an outdoor scene. (I'm not from the U.S.)

I suppose that a warrant for this was obtained fairly quickly in this case?

 

[arielilane]

Kidnapping has a five-yr statute of limitations in the state of IN. That law needs to be changed! moo

 

[twall]

Thank you ALL for the posting on the hearings. I took LOTS of notes! Any NEXT hearing date set yet? TIA!

No, judge did not set a hearing date.

 

[Yemelyan]

And I thanked you for your reply. Part of my question was if Luminol was used as part of search of DNA evidence on an outdoor scene. And your reply was informative.

Yes, it can be used at outdoor scenes and is. IMO it may behave slightly differently than if being used on indoor items, like, car upholstery for example, and they spray test areas to make sure they have good controls.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

interesting notes from MS

- police can’t get into MWs phone. surprise surprise. but they do have screenshots of comms with ‘andy’ from his icloud. these are sealed.

- MW positioned as some highly valued sought after consultant???? would love to know if he was paid then.

- Snay. Lol. why was this clown even brought to court? judge also shut down one other you tuber.

- 3 attorneys called by the defence were very good. why didn’t they just go with this. they said the leak was not such a big deal.

- baldwin not called as a witness by the defence. quelle surprise. rozzi was called.

- holder was never a key suspect in 2017. had a good alibi. this is an issue about whether the case could be dismissed due to the accidental erasure.

I also to TMS last night and there was one interesting thing that caught my ear during the contempt trial summary.
During cross Holeman ( I believe) was asked by DH if any of the crime scene photos leaked to TMS had shown evidence of boot prints or a tripod indention.
It made me wonder if they were alluding to a tripod indention being discovered at the murder scene.

 

[Yemelyan]

Thank you so much for your informative (as always) answers.
Would Luminol have been able to detect blood stains on years-old, washed-many-times clothing?

Impossible to say with 100% certainty based on how many times an article of clothing had been laundered but I can tell you this has been studied. One 2017 study said that luminescence was still detected on over 95% of washed samples even though no blood was visible to the naked eye (and DNA extraction was still possible): Blood Trace Evidence on Washed Textiles - a systematic approach - PubMed

Though I would not be willing to extrapolate from that to the Delphi case specifically since there are so many unknowns. A hoodie might be washed more frequently in the intervening years but a coat possibly not that much. Car interior, possibly not that much.

One cautionary thing is that Luminol/BlueStar will also react to bleach and some other cleaning agents that contain oxidative agents. This would particularly be of concern if looking at laundered clothes or cleaned surfaces. However, forensic technicians are aware of this and have ways of analyzing that account for it IMO.

 

[Oculus]

Impossible to say with 100% certainty based on how many times an article of clothing had been laundered but I can tell you this has been studied. One 2017 study said that luminescence was still detected on over 95% of washed samples even though no blood was visible to the naked eye (and DNA extraction was still possible): Blood Trace Evidence on Washed Textiles - a systematic approach - PubMed

Though I would not be willing to extrapolate from that to the Delphi case specifically since there are so many unknowns. A hoodie might be washed more frequently in the intervening years but a coat possibly not that much. Car interior, possibly not that much.

One cautionary thing is that Luminol/BlueStar will also react to bleach and some other cleaning agents that contain oxidative agents. This would particularly be of concern if looking at laundered clothes or cleaned surfaces. However, forensic technicians are aware of this and have ways of analyzing that account for it IMO.

Just speculating here, but if the perp used a car after the crime, wouldn't it light up like a xmas-tree during a Luminol check, even years after...?

Given that the perp didn't thoroughly clean himself and his clothes before entering the car, or even more thoroughly, cleaning the car interior afterwards.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Impossible to say with 100% certainty based on how many times an article of clothing had been laundered but I can tell you this has been studied. One 2017 study said that luminescence was still detected on over 95% of washed samples even though no blood was visible to the naked eye (and DNA extraction was still possible): Blood Trace Evidence on Washed Textiles - a systematic approach - PubMed

Though I would not be willing to extrapolate from that to the Delphi case specifically since there are so many unknowns. A hoodie might be washed more frequently in the intervening years but a coat possibly not that much. Car interior, possibly not that much.

One cautionary thing is that Luminol/BlueStar will also react to bleach and some other cleaning agents that contain oxidative agents. This would particularly be of concern if looking at laundered clothes or cleaned surfaces. However, forensic technicians are aware of this and have ways of analyzing that account for it IMO.

Thank you.

I searched on two different occasions because, on the sw return, there appears to be no samples taken. I didn't know if they would have used Luminol and found nothing or ??

 

[girlhasnoname]

B Kohlberger was always given new suits to wear by his defense team. The same with Barry Morphew when he was still incarcerated.

I wonder WHY this defense team is not asking for their client to have a suit to wear? Do they maybe want him to look harassed and broken?

Because the D is painting the picture of poor little ole' RA, so short and feeble could he really be capable of something so heinous??? He's been so mistreated, he's just a meek and mild CVS pharm tech, just look at him. Sympathy card 101.

That is the textbook opposite of a Defense who wants to present a strong, confident Defendant.

MOO

 

[arielilane]

Thank you ALL for the posting on the hearings. I took LOTS of notes! Any NEXT hearing date set yet? TIA!

No hearing date set at this time.

@BobSegallWTHR

Gull did not rule on the contempt issue today. She graciously allowed the defense request to submit a post hearing memo to sum up its arguments in writing. That’s due in 1 week. The prosecutor will then have a week to respond. So no contempt decision until April. #wthr 14/


8:21 PM · Mar 18, 2024

@BobSegallWTHR

The line is already forming for today’s hearings in the #Delphi murders case.
@SamJohnsonNews @EmilyWTHR and I will have updates for you from the Allen County courthouse on 13News throughout the day. #wthr




View attachment 491551View attachment 491552


A lot to digest from today’s #Delphi hearing in Fort Wayne. A of today’s events… starting with additional charges against Richard Allen. #wthr 1/


Allen is now facing 2 additional murder charges for the deaths of Abby & Libby Legal expert Katie Jackson Lindsey says the new charges give the Carroll Co prosecutor another avenue to convict Allen without having to prove he’s the one who actually killed the girls. #wthr 2/


The prosecutor also wanted to add two counts of kidnapping but agreed today to abandon that request after conceding the charge falls outside the 5-yr statute of limitations. #wthr 3/


Much of the day was spent on determining whether Allen’s attorneys should be held in contempt. Prosecutor Nick McLeland called three investigators as witnesses. While all seemed credible, none made a slam dunk case tying Allen’s attorney to intentionally leaking info. #wthr 4/


McLeland claimed Brad Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin engaged in a prolonged campaign to leak #Delphi case info to win public support, but I think he fell short of proving that claim in any of the 4 instances he focused on. #wthr 5/


1. Issuing a defense press release against judge’s gag order
2. Mistakenly emailing an evidence list to someone not working the case
3. Major leak of crime scene photos from Baldwin’s office
4. Communicating case info directly to the leaker #wthr 6/


Appears 1. press release came a day BEFORE the gag order was issued.
2. The mistaken email was an error, not premeditated.
3. Neither attorney knew pics were being stolen from Baldwin’s office.
4. Not enough evidence to show Baldwin provided case info directly to leaker. #wthr 7/


While the prosecutor’s case was not air tight, the defense’s presentation today was a downright mess. Attorney David Hennessy chose to focus on YouTuber and Internet Skeuther testimony rather than holes in prosecution arguments. That didn’t fly with Judge Gull. #wthr 8/


The judge sustained nearly every objection to strike defense witness testimony based on irrelevance and scolded Hennessy by stating he couldn’t substantiate or support many of his claims and statements. #wthr 9/


Hennessy did score points in defense of Rozzi & Baldwin by clarifying the press release timeline (before the gag order) and reminding the judge that “willful, intentional disobedience” is needed to find contempt. (Although the judge did not appreciate the reminder.) #wthr 10/


The contempt hearing underscored the bad blood that remains between Judge Gull & the #Delphi defense attorneys. While I truly think the judge tried to be patient, her general demeanor during the hearings was one of disgust & impatience for defense requests & arguments. #wthr 11/


Again, the disgust might be warranted based on today’s defense strategy & line of questioning—but not likely to convince anyone of her impartiality following claims of bias by the defense. Her temper was on display throughout the hearings & directed only at the defense. #wthr 12/


Gull snapped at Hennessy for asking the judge to repeat herself, repeatedly told him to stop interrupting her & admonished him for an “inappropriate” comment toward the prosecutor. Her admonishments often seemed justified. The condescending tone was not. #wthr /13


Gull did not rule on the contempt issue today. She graciously allowed the defense request to submit a post hearing memo to sum up its arguments in writing. That’s due in 1 week. The prosecutor will then have a week to respond. So no contempt decision until April. #wthr 14/


I did not attend most of the late afternoon hearing about the defense request to dismiss charges because of alleged destruction of evidence by the state. But I heard the tense interactions between the judge and defense continued. #wthr 15/


The defense is upset about the state recording over possible witness interviews in the days immediately following Abby & Libby’s murders. They say the destruction of possible evidence helpful to their client is grounds for dismissal. The judge took it under advisement. #wthr 16/


Other important nuggets from today’s #Delphi hearings…The judge DENIED multiple defense motions to 1. delay today’s contempt hearing,
2. recuse the prosecutor from the hearing so he could be called to testify, & 3. recuse Gull from the case in lieu of another judge.#wthr 17/


The judge did not outright deny two other requests, which she “noted,” suggesting there might be possible merit. The first was a defense objection that Gull did not appoint another special judge to oversee the contempt hearing. Hennessy said it’s required by law. #wthr 18/


The second was the defense objection that Gull held today’s hearings in her Allen Co courtroom rather than in Carroll Co. There was an agreement that all #Delphi hearings (except jury selection) would be in Delphi except if there were exceptional circumstances. #wthr 19/


Asked by the defense if she would explain the exceptional circumstance for holding today’s hearing in Ft Wayne rather than in Delphi, Gull refused to explain. But she did pledge to hold future #Delphi hearings in Carroll County. #wthr 20/


Today was the first time we’ve seen Richard Allen is nearly 9 months. He looked healthier than when we saw him last June. He was engaged and alert and, for the first time, I saw him smile (once)—something that did not seem in the realm of possibility last summer. #wthr 20/


The victims’ families were in court today (as they always are) watching every move by the prosecutor & defense and this whole ugly saga play. In many ways, it has nothing to do with the murders of their beloved Abby & Libby. And yet it has everything to do with them. #wthr 21/


For the sake of the victims’ and defendant’s families, let’s hope all these side battles that distract and delay a trial to ultimately determine truth and achieve justice in #Delphi are nearing an end. #wthr 22/

 

[Boxer]

They can't spray Luminol without probable cause or warrant? Sounds outrageous.

They got a permission (search warrant) to luminol almost immediately in Jennifer Dulos case. Judges are on call
just for this, to have the oversight - but its basically a phone call.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Right but this business concerns contempt charges for RA's defense attorney's actions, not the deliverance of RA from his possible conviction appeal in the future. So why are they on the ready today?

For likes and click$$$ because they love the attention. It's a game to be played (not about the real victims here, Abby & Libby), but they got played themselves. Hennessy aka "The Beast" was supposed to win with a clean sweep of his many outlandish and poorly written Motions. I guess their intention to pressure Judge G wimped out like a wet noodle.

Maybe the D and their minions believe they are so smart and so tough that with righteous indignation they spout out every thought in their little heads in their Motions, tweets, podcasts and YT content subsequently building each other's egos even grander if possible.

What the D should be focused on in their client Defendant Allen and just how they are going to present an effective trial strategy, which he is entitled to by law.

Who am I kidding? I honestly believe the D are doing everything they can to get this trial dismissed and/or to get as many appellate issues on the books as possible beforehand, and that includes ineffective counsel.

This Defense IS NOT READY, nor have they ever been. If that didn't show in spades yesterday, I don't know what would.

MOO