Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #184

[sunshineray]

View attachment 505524View attachment 505525View attachment 505526View attachment 505527View attachment 505528The latest letters.

I'm sorry, while I find it well written and yes hilariously on point, I cannot believe the court allowed it to be publicly filed. This surprises me, JMO

 

[EOA]

YUP. Maybe. MOO.

YUP!! These Odinites are not only the guilty murderers in the eyes of the D, they're also the not-at-all very bright murderers who brought phones. But that was okay because of a corrupt LE coverup and plot against RA.

I guess a smart, cunning murderer wouldn't have brought a phone. Let's take it a step further. Would a smart, cunning murderer maybe have approached a CO and made 100% certain to mention a stock ticker on his person on those trails that day, implying he had a trackable device? It would probably be reassuring to some extent for anyone in authority to hear that. Unless there's no phone, in which case it becomes potentially terrifying to have heard it.

Is it certain at this point RA had no phone?

To your last sentence- DD recorded some ID information from a phone which RA brought to the interview. Nothing is certain it was the same phone he had with him on 2/13 if he did indeed have one on him then.

If RA is guilty and knew then that this early interview would eventually turn into a double murder investigation where phone info would be extracted, it seems he might’ve shown up at the grocery interview (if pre-arranged) without a phone on him - or at least tried to coordinate the presence or absence of his phone with what data LE would be expected to uncover.

Or maybe he just wasn’t thinking ahead like that and blundered.

 

[sunshineray]

To your last sentence- DD recorded some ID information from a phone which RA brought to the interview. Nothing is certain it was the same phone he had with him on 2/13 if he did indeed have one on him then.

If RA is guilty and knew then that this early interview would eventually turn into a double murder investigation where phone info would be extracted, it seems he might’ve shown up at the grocery interview (if pre-arranged) without a phone on him - or at least tried to coordinate the presence or absence of his phone with what data LE would be expected to uncover.

Or maybe he just wasn’t thinking ahead like that and blundered.

Hope it's the last one. I never considered that recorded phone info could come back to the search finding all those phones and if that one was missing...an interesting point. Or if that phone wasn't found on the tower dump info is also interesting.

 

[Megnut]

Hope it's the last one. I never considered that recorded phone info could come back to the search finding all those phones and if that one was missing...an interesting point. Or if that phone wasn't found on the tower dump info is also interesting.

He outdumbed himself, I suspect.

Didn't want to say he saw Abby and Libby, knew he was seen by the group of juveniles, so he said he didn't give the group much notice.

Guessing he was pressed... because witness testimony put him on the path which would pit him against Abby and Libby. This is the point for which he presplained that he didn't notice anyone. Because he was so engrossed in his stock ticker on his phone (or on A phone at any rate).

If there was a phone in line with his trajectory that day, interacting with cell towers, and it's RA's phone, he's toast. If it's an unidentified phone, he's toast. And if he left his phone somewhere else, off or in airplane mode, he's toast. And if any combination of those things occurred, he's toast.

His phone at home while he's at the bridge, that is toast on toast.

It might have alibi'd him (he couldn't have killed the girls, he was at home napping, with his phone) except for his vehicle and his admissions/confessions.

Already the Defense is stretching their Frank's taffy -- attempting to confuse with extraneous phone numbers (smoke and mirrors with the location of phones, the timeframe and accuracy of the technology/analysis). A whole mess of phones at the start of the trail at 4:30 pm means next to nothing, relative to the murders.

Notably the Defense isn't citing anything aabout RA's cellphone activity and IMO that's because the evidence is not just not-alibi-ing, it's downright damning, absence or presence.

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I'm sorry, while I find it well written and yes hilariously on point, I cannot believe the court allowed it to be publicly filed. This surprises me, JMO

I will just say I have never, in my entire life, heard of people writing into a court with their opinions about how things are going. Much less, to have those letters made public. I don’t care what they’re saying, I think it’s appalling.
Is this something just allowed in Indiana? Where any-old-body is allowed to weigh in, in seriousness or total jest in something as serious as a double murder trial.
And now it’s part of the trial record.
Appalling.

 

[ClearAhead]

He outdumbed himself, I suspect.

Didn't want to say he saw Abby and Libby, knew he was seen by the group of juveniles, so he said he didn't give the group much notice.

Guessing he was pressed... because witness testimony put him on the path which would pit him against Abby and Libby. This is the point for which he presplained that he didn't notice anyone. Because he was so engrossed in his stock ticker on his phone (or on A phone at any rate).

If there was a phone in line with his trajectory that day, interacting with cell towers, and it's RA's phone, he's toast. If it's an unidentified phone, he's toast. And if he left his phone somewhere else, off or in airplane mode, he's toast. And if any combination of those things occurred, he's toast.

His phone at home while he's at the bridge, that is toast on toast.

It might have alibi'd him (he couldn't have killed the girls, he was at home napping, with his phone) except for his vehicle and his admissions/confessions.

Already the Defense is stretching their Frank's taffy -- attempting to confuse with extraneous phone numbers (smoke and mirrors with the location of phones, the timeframe and accuracy of the technology/analysis). A whole mess of phones at the start of the trail at 4:30 pm means next to nothing, relative to the murders.

Notably the Defense isn't citing anything aabout RA's cellphone activity and IMO that's because the evidence is not just not-alibi-ing, it's downright damning, absence or presence.

JMO

This is why I think he spoke with the DD while the girls were still considered missing, before it became a murder investigation. He didn’t want to
1. become the last person to have seen them.
2. by not claiming to have sighted them on or near the bridge at the time he was there shifted the time frame of the murder either forward or back. But he couldn’t have known about Libby’s cellphone’s timestamped video/pics which contradicted his account. Interestingly I recall it was mentioned as a point of contention early on how LE refused to clarify a specific timeline. I believe for that very RA became trapped in his web of lies. No other way out but for him to attempt to change his story at the 11th hour.
3. he was intentionally distancing himself as a possible witness ‘unhelpful, i know nothing’. Which to a some degree was successful as his interview with the DD didn’t rise to immediate attention of LE.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I will just say I have never, in my entire life, heard of people writing into a court with their opinions about how things are going. Much less, to have those letters made public. I don’t care what they’re saying, I think it’s appalling.
Is this something just allowed in Indiana? Where any-old-body is allowed to weigh in, in seriousness or total jest in something as serious as a double murder trial.
And now it’s part of the trial record.
Appalling.

I agree, it's just a crazy notion that there's a gag order so ya'll don't go trashing eachother BUT if anybody and their brother wants to write to the Judge about how everything is going in your eyes, welcome children, everyone is welcome, AND we'll file it publicly so you get your points heard and your 15 mins of fame too! Just nuts
MO

 

[Justice101]

This is why I think he spoke with the DD while the girls were still considered missing, before it became a murder investigation. He didn’t want to
1. become the last person to have seen them.
2. by not claiming to have sighted them on or near the bridge at the time he was there shifted the time frame of the murder either forward or back. But he couldn’t have known about Libby’s cellphone’s timestamped video/pics which contradicted his account. Interestingly I recall it was mentioned as a point of contention early on how LE refused to clarify a specific timeline. I believe for that very RA became trapped in his web of lies. No other way out but for him to attempt to change his story at the 11th hour.
3. he was intentionally distancing himself as a possible witness ‘unhelpful, i know nothing’. Which to a some degree was successful as his interview with the DD didn’t rise to immediate attention of LE.

JMO

Are you sure he identified himself BEFORE the girls were found?

I mean that was only 10AM to Noon the next morning.

I would think he came forward AFTER is was announced there were 2 homicides.

 

[Megnut]

This is why I think he spoke with the DD while the girls were still considered missing, before it became a murder investigation. He didn’t want to
1. become the last person to have seen them.
2. by not claiming to have sighted them on or near the bridge at the time he was there shifted the time frame of the murder either forward or back. But he couldn’t have known about Libby’s cellphone’s timestamped video/pics which contradicted his account. Interestingly I recall it was mentioned as a point of contention early on how LE refused to clarify a specific timeline. I believe for that very RA became trapped in his web of lies. No other way out but for him to attempt to change his story at the 11th hour.
3. he was intentionally distancing himself as a possible witness ‘unhelpful, i know nothing’. Which to a some degree was successful as his interview with the DD didn’t rise to immediate attention of LE.

JMO

Yes, yes and yes!

Plus there's the element of inherent bias, we all have it. DD is no different. You don't expect the killer to come forward! He made a strategic move IMO. Tried to rebrand himself as a helper.

Later, we remember that perps will sometimes insert themselves into investigations. That's one of the reasons why LE goes back to the beginnings.

I think of the perp who abducted a teen. LE arrived within 4 minutes of the call. Two adults dead, swiftly determined the teen was missing. LE missed it until after the teen rescued herself some 80 days later -- arriving LE met the perp's vehicle on their way to the call. Perp pulled over to let the emergency vehicle pass. Bias. LE dismissed it. Perps speed away. Perps don't obey the traffic laws, pull over, let LE pass. Except they do.

RA tried to get out ahead of it. He was there, didn't see anything of much consequence (based on his sanitized version of events), just a concerned father and pharmacist-type. I can't recall now -- did he give his actual phone number to DD? I recall something sketchy about that. Not the phone number but the IMEI or something? I recall not knowing what that means.... new phone? Different phone? New phone number? A deliberate presplain -- did he try to engineer some funny business about his phone? Another case, the perp says, whoops, accidentally factory reset his phone. Did RA himself contribute to his tip being misfiled by virtue of the information he did and didn't provide and how he provided it?

All MOO

 

[Boxer]

Exactly!! Right!!! Just pop on in and tell them you were there. But no! He meets a CO in the parking lot of a grocery store. Makes no sense whatsoever.

RA works a hundred feet from the grocery, so maybe he asked for the that place.
Or could be the CO was there already talking to customers.
There were manned road checkpoints everywhere stopping traffic and asking if they had any information. Maybe CO stationed at Save-a-lot.

 

[snooptroop88]

RA works a hundred feet from the grocery, so maybe he asked for the that place.
Or could be the CO was there already talking to customers.
There were manned road checkpoints everywhere stopping traffic and asking if they had any information. Maybe CO stationed at Save-a-lot.

Agreed. I'm soooo wanting the details of that interview, and I know I'm going to be waiting till Oct to get them. But I know something went terribly wrong at that interview. There's something in that interview that either raised a flag at the time (doubtful because if that were the case, it wouldn't have been misplaced), OR that raised huge flags upon later review. SO (!!!) curious to know, but thinking it has to be bad because otherwise, the D would have been broadcasting it on their megaphones by now as "exculpatory." As it is, D has little to say on the interview. Too little to say from the authors of the Franks.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

It’s not my position per se that there were two groups of girls, though IMO it’s conceivable IF RA’s 2022 version of him being at the trail starting at noon to is believed or can be supported. IF so, the similarly described encounters could have been up to 90-ish minutes apart and would been more likely to have involved different parties. We don’t to my knowledge have any roster of people on the trails that much earlier but common usage would estimate another dozen to 15 people that might’ve been there at noon but not at 1:30.

The P’s crafty yet brilliant wording in the PCA of “Investigators interviewed 3 juvenile girls” led us all to believe for a long time that this was a tidy agreement that RA saw 3 girls per DD interview and likewise a group of 3 girls saw BG - therefore RA must be BG. It did not come out until later docs that the group of girls seeing the likely BG was actually 4 (BW, AS, RV plus her sister IV) which would’ve been an inconvenient fact to put in the PCA. As said previously the best way to confirm each party is describing the same encounter is to confirm RA’s statement to DD that one of the above initialed girls was in fact noticeably taller and with dark hair.

You are probably correct IMO about the reason only 3 of the group of 4 girls were interviewed.

Wasn't one of the girls (BW), the sister of KG's boyfriend (CW) at the time of these horrific murders? She was the taller girl with dark hair IIRC.

 

[Melted]

IMO something very damning was found as a result of the Search Warrant. Some clothes were missing IIRC. Pictures, blood transfer in the vehicle, a knife with DNA of the girls on it and that “keepsake box”. I shudder to think what may have been found.

If there was nothing that linked him to the crime scene, (their words not mine), there certainly could be something that linked him to the girls or the girls to him. Clever wordsmithing seems to be a talent of the Defence.

There’s something there. If not, what’s the worry?

MOO

I believe the worry is the gun that the prosecution is claiming ejected an unspent round at the crime scene that can tie RA directly to it, without that gun there is no case.

 

[Spartygirl]

Wasn't one of the girls (BW), the sister of KG's boyfriend (CW) at the time of these horrific murders? She was the taller girl with dark hair IIRC.

IIRC, Yes

 

[FrostedGlass]

Agreed. I'm soooo wanting the details of that interview, and I know I'm going to be waiting till Oct to get them. But I know something went terribly wrong at that interview. There's something in that interview that either raised a flag at the time (doubtful because if that were the case, it wouldn't have been misplaced), OR that raised huge flags upon later review. SO (!!!) curious to know, but thinking it has to be bad because otherwise, the D would have been broadcasting it on their megaphones by now as "exculpatory." As it is, D has little to say on the interview. Too little to say from the authors of the Franks.

Apparently this is all there is. The D has asked for the recording of the interview but it seems to have disappeared. Dulin now has a few more months to find it. I don't know what more the D can be expected to say except: "Hey Dulin, did you find that recording yet?"
IMO

 

[sunshineray]

Apparently this is all there is. The D has asked for the recording of the interview but it seems to have disappeared. Dulin now has a few more months to find it. I don't know what more the D can be expected to say except: "Hey Dulin, did you find that recording yet?"
IMO

View attachment 505740

Where is it stated DD had a recording of his interview with RA? If it's one of the FM's could you please provide the page number. TIA

 

[snooptroop88]

Where is it stated DD had a recording of his interview with RA? If it's one of the FM's could you please provide the page number. TIA

Whoops, I think that's right to ask on this because I'm positive somewhere nobody knew if it had been recorded. I think what I read was that Richard Allen himself didn't know if it was recorded. Here, it's in the D's own press release:

"Rick volunteered to meet with a Conservation Officer outside of the local grocery store to offer up details of his trip to the trail on the day in question. Rick tried to assist with the investigation and told the police that he did recall seeing three younger girls on the trail that day. His contact with the girls was brief and of little significance. Rick does not recall if this interaction with the Conservation Officer was tape-recorded but believes that the Conservation Officer scribbled notes on a notepad as Rick spoke to him."

Would think it's unlikely the CO recorded this in a grocery parking lot. I think if they moved to a different location or vehicle, it would likely be specified somewhere. I doubt RA minds this one not being recorded, jmo.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Where is it stated DD had a recording of his interview with RA? If it's one of the FM's could you please provide the page number. TIA

Page 132 You're welcome. I appreciate that you asked for the page number. I think we should do that with all these docs.

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion.pdf

www.scribd.com

Well, since we can’t necessarily trust DNR Dan’s accuracy in writing reports, at least there would be a tape-recording that would be able to provide the precise words used by Richard Allen, right? Wrong. Find attached Exhibit 124 which is a report provided to the Defense in discovery from DNR Dan concerning his interview of Richard Allen. In this report, DNR Dan wrote the following: “

I checked my audio recordings and cannot find one for him. I will keep looking because I am sure I recorded every interaction I had related to my assigned leads

Footnotes.
When Liggett was asked if Dulin made any mistakes in the report that he (Dulin) drafted following his interview, Liggett responded: “I don’t. -- none that I’m aware of, no.” (Liggett depo. P. 11, lines 7-12)
but fellow Unified Command member Jerry Holeman had a different answer:” There was an error; I don’t know if it was processing or whatever you want to call it. But at some point, it got lost in the shuffle and entered incorrectly.” (Holeman depo. P... 0

 

[FrostedGlass]

Reposted because I forgot my link
Page 9

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23863675/allen-search-warrant-return.pdf

 

[snooptroop88]

Page 132 You're welcome. I appreciate that you asked for the page number. I think we should do that with all these docs.

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion.pdf

www.scribd.com

Well, since we can’t necessarily trust DNR Dan’s accuracy in writing reports, at least there would be a tape-recording that would be able to provide the precise words used by Richard Allen, right? Wrong. Find attached Exhibit 124 which is a report provided to the Defense in discovery from DNR Dan concerning his interview of Richard Allen. In this report, DNR Dan wrote the following: “

I checked my audio recordings and cannot find one for him. I will keep looking because I am sure I recorded every interaction I had related to my assigned leads

Footnotes.
When Liggett was asked if Dulin made any mistakes in the report that he (Dulin) drafted following his interview, Liggett responded: “I don’t. -- none that I’m aware of, no.” (Liggett depo. P. 11, lines 7-12)
but fellow Unified Command member Jerry Holeman had a different answer:” There was an error; I don’t know if it was processing or whatever you want to call it. But at some point, it got lost in the shuffle and entered incorrectly.” (Holeman depo. P... 0

Probably because it was in a supermarket parking lot, and may have been spur-of-the-moment, perhaps because of the way in which RA approached the interview. We'd have to know more.

Thanks for providing the page and quote because I won't look at the Franks for literally anything. But you know, I'll make an exception and look, just because I want to check something based on this post. Looking. Yes, it's just as you noted it, they actually write it this way: "Well, since we can’t necessarily trust DNR Dan’s accuracy in writing reports, at least there would be a tape-recording that would be able to provide the precise words used by Richard Allen, right? Wrong."

You know, I'm wondering about the professionalism of referring to the conservation officer that RA himself evidently chose to speak with as "DNR Dan." This is after all a legal document, not one of their meetings with YouTube leakers where they probably felt more at ease. (Unfortunately.)

Does RA look at him as "DNR Dan," too? I mean as opposed to LE, "FBI" or "ISP murder investigator"? Something to think about.