Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #185

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
RA for all we know could have been one of multiple people with the password to the A Shots account. It could have been him setting up a meeting at the bridge.
This is what I lean towards. He may have seen the convo about the girls going to the bridge.

His wife was out of town for a family emergency so he knew he had time home alone, with no interference.
 
More like chaos, with this bunch of D lawyers and their buddy youtubers, is to be avoided at all costs. Maybe, just maybe, audio will be piped into a room with just a select few proven journalists with integrity, who can the report as it happens. **fingers crossed**

That would be better than nothing, but so far this judge has proven she wants the public to be completely in the dark about how she runs her courtroom (except for the time she planned to public humiliate the defense attorneys). She, by all appearances, is completely averse to transparency to the taxpayers. Sad.

IMO MOO
 
That would be better than nothing, but so far this judge has proven she wants the public to be completely in the dark about how she runs her courtroom (except for the time she planned to public humiliate the defense attorneys). She, by all appearances, is completely averse to transparency to the taxpayers. Sad.

IMO MOO
I think she wants the circus to stay out of town when the trial starts. I'd like nothing better than to watch it live. But I very much understand that the climate already created and that which continues to pop up, even now by supposedly esteemed appellate and constitutional lawyers who can't keep out of things that are none of their business, as they don't represent RA for the charges of murder. It's toxic if allowed near the courtroom, inside or out.

We have people recieving death threats for themselves and family members, a state's attorney being stalked, victims family members being harassed and so many other absurd and abhorrent behaviors by the D and it's minions. It needs to be kept out of the courtroom and away from jurors.

This is what happens when lawyer's lawyers preach to social media and instigate others to do what RA's D cannot because of a court-ordered gag order. AJMO
 
I think she wants the circus to stay out of town when the trial starts. I'd like nothing better than to watch it live. But I very much understand that the climate already created and that which continues to pop up, even now by supposedly esteemed appellate and constitutional lawyers who can't keep out of things that are none of their business, as they don't represent RA for the charges of murder. It's toxic if allowed near the courtroom, inside or out.

We have people recieving death threats for themselves and family members, a state's attorney being stalked, victims family members being harassed and so many other absurd and abhorrent behaviors by the D and it's minions. It needs to be kept out of the courtroom and away from jurors.

This is what happens when lawyer's lawyers preach to social media and instigate others to do what RA's D cannot because of a court-ordered gag order. AJMO

It's hardly the first case things like this have happened in and other jurisdictions handle it just fine.

IMO MOO
 
Never have I seen a case like this, even OJ case wasn't like this...AJMO

Of course not. Social media wasn't a thing. I remember listening to the verdict on the car radio in the parking lot of where I was working at the time.

ETA: Gone are the days of courts and LE being allowed to be corrupt. AS corrupt, I should say. There are just too many eyes and ears paying attention, thanks to advancements in technology. They may want to be secret and non-transparent, but it's getting harder and harder for them to do so.

IMO MOO
 
That would be better than nothing, but so far this judge has proven she wants the public to be completely in the dark about how she runs her courtroom (except for the time she planned to public humiliate the defense attorneys). She, by all appearances, is completely averse to transparency to the taxpayers. Sad.

IMO MOO
There have been other trials not publicly streamed also ( Patrick Frazee-Kelsey Berreth trial, Lori Vallow's trial)

It is up to the Judge to determine that as it is their courtroom and while I may dislike that decision as I love following along live video to watch, I respect that decision.

There is nothing adverse or anything to do with humiliation regarding these judge's decisions.

In this case, I can certainly understand her NOT wanting the "circus" ring to be in attendance, the Defense team's circus of youtubers to not be there and their lack of obeying the gag orders until trial is over.

Hopefully, Like @sunshineray stated, a few reputable news media will be allowed in, not to stream, per say, but can update via tweets on breaks as they did for the ones mentioned above.
Otherwise, I will have to put in for vacation/PTO days to be there myself !!
 
Last edited:
There have been other trials not publicly streamed also ( Patrick Frazee-Kelsey Berreth trial, Lori Vallow's trial)

It is up to the Judge to determine that as it is their courtroom and I while I may dislike that decision as I love following along live video to watch, I respect that decision.

There is nothing adverse or anything to do with humiliation regarding these judge's decisions.

In this case, I can certainly understand her NOT wanting the "circus" ring to be in attendance, the Defense team's circus of youtubers to not be there and their lack of obeying the gag orders until trial is over.

Hopefully, Like @sunshineray stated, a few reputable news media will be allowed in, not to stream, per say, but can update via tweets on breaks as they did for the ones mentioned above.

I predict she will allow nothing.
 
I'm talking about the Ames study that AugustWest posted early.
It does look like we’re quoting from different studies. Didn’t catch that. The link @August West posted for FBI/Ames contained a study design but no results. The study I’ve been citing characterizes its findings thus:

“The results of this study are consistent with prior studies, despite its comprehensive design and challenging specimens.”
 
I want to do a little independent research....

Can anyone point me to another case where the judge had to go before the Supreme Court, pre-trial, because of their erroneous decision to throw the defense attorneys off the case? (And had their decision overturned by the SC)

Thanks in advance, if you can help.
 
Last edited:
Didn't Judge G say that she already released the funds for the expert the D was saying had not been funded ?
From “Response to motion to disqualify” (Accessed through the Files section of Murder Sheet Facebook)
Defendant asserts the Court has denied reasonable requests for funding. This is incorrect.
Counsel is well aware of the amount of funds the Court has authorized for the defendant. The Court has requested the defendant to submit proper invoices and bills for Carroll County taxpayer funding. Invoices which have been submitted without appropriate documentation have been returned. The bill counsel refers to for $26,000 for investigative services from June 4, 2023, through October 16, 2023, was, in fact, returned to counsel as no documentation was provided for services. No documentation was submitted until quite recently. With that proper support and documentation, the Court authorized that invoice for payment on May 17, 2024.


This is one example that has made me rally mistrust this defence team. They made so much of RA being denied funds for his defence, and even created a fundraising campaign on this injustice.

My Opinion Only
 
Last edited:
I'm a legal firearms owner. Licensed. Everything here is just my experience and from my firearms safety courses, the range and cleaning.

You can manually cycle a semi-automatic like the Sig Sauer P226.

The best way to picture a manual cycle is in movies when the bad guy pulls back on the top of the gun , which IMO is typically shown as a sign that the situation is escalating. He's essentially moving a round (bullet) from the magazine and into the chamber of the gun where it will be ready to fire.

The next time he pulls the trigger, the gun will fire and automatically cycle to the next bullet.

If he was to 'pull back' aka manual cycle again, any round that was in the chamber would be expelled out of the gun, unfired. IMO, there are a number of mechanical and metal parts that could cause markings during a manual extract from my observations and knowing what it looks like on the inside from cleaning it.

IMO RA forgot that he had a round already chambered a round into the gun. From personal experience, this is extremely common and the 100th reason why you should always leave your gun locked, trigger locked, unloaded before storing it etc etc.

IMO RA pulls back on the slide of the gun to chamber a round...like they do in Hollywood movies...to show them that he was serious. And when he did that the round that was already sitting in the chamber expelled out onto the ground. I doubt that he wouldn't have noticed. He probably just couldn't' find it after all was said and done.

As far as the firing of the gun once. I have no clue why they would need to. Maybe it was important to demonstrate that it was functioning? I don't know. MOO.

Again, all MOO. Everything above is my experience as an owner of this specific semi-automatic pistol. An pretty common firearm.
Thank you for your insight.
Can you please explain more about the markings you're talking about here?
I've read that there could be an ejector mark and extractor marks.
I have no idea what they look like or how they could positively identify RA's gun.
RA was in the National Guard; I imagined that he remembered his training.

"IMO, there are a number of mechanical and metal parts that could cause markings during a manual extract from my observations and knowing what it looks like on the inside from cleaning it."
 
From “Response to motion to disqualify” (Accessed through the Files section of Murder Sheet Facebook)
Defendant asserts the Court has denied reasonable requests for funding. This is incorrect.
Counsel is well aware of the amount of funds the Court has authorized for the defendant. The Court has requested the defendant to submit proper invoices and bills for Carroll County taxpayer funding. Invoices which have been submitted without appropriate documentation have been returned. The bill counsel refers to for $26,000 for investigative services from June 4, 2023, through October 16, 2023, was, in fact, returned to counsel as no documentation was provided for services. No documentation was submitted until quite recently. With that proper support and documentation, the Court authorized that invoice for payment on May 17, 2024.


This is one example that has made me rally mistrust this defence team. They made so much of RA being denied funds for his defence, and even created a fundraising campaign on this injustice.

My Opinion Only
Did you read the hoops the D jumped through to get the funding?
Note that JG only addresses that one issue. There are more than just that one.

I don't know where the problem is here but I do believe this judge marches to her own beat. Maybe her ideas of documentation are different from what the D's are used to.

JG does use the word "unsupported" often in her refusals for funding. What does that even mean? Are they not submitting the proper paperwork or does she find the additional services unnecessary?

Here's one of the denials from the document I linked below:
This Court denied the funding request, finding that
one assistant’s invoices had been “inadequate,” and
the need for the assistants was “unsupported.”

 
Of course not. Social media wasn't a thing. I remember listening to the verdict on the car radio in the parking lot of where I was working at the time.

ETA: Gone are the days of courts and LE being allowed to be corrupt. AS corrupt, I should say. There are just too many eyes and ears paying attention, thanks to advancements in technology. They may want to be secret and non-transparent, but it's getting harder and harder for them to do so.

IMO MOO
I view it a different way. Gone are the days where media, in this particular case social media, is kept at enough distance where they don't become an actual part an of the case. It does not serve justice at all to have one side engaged in a kind of SM gerrymandering to sway potential juror's votes, especially when there's a gag order and a sealing of files in place to try and ensure a fair trial. AJMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
1,106
Total visitors
1,265

Forum statistics

Threads
600,559
Messages
18,110,543
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top