Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #191

[Salah11]

Objectively, they saw someone. It’s possible they saw RA. We could even say likely since he reported that he saw some kids there as well. But how did they identify that it was specifically RA vs literally any other man who may have been lurking about that day? Did LE do some sort of lineup? Did they show the kids photos? If yes to either, were the men brought in / photos shown one by one or was a a group presented at the same time? What sort of questions did LE ask if the kids were asked to do a lineup? EG: did police say: who did you see that day (which implies the guy they saw IS in the lineup, even if he might not be and which is leading the witness). A lot of people have noted that RA looks a lot like any other guy - sometimes even like some of the other possible suspects that LE have discussed in public in the past, but who’s names I do not remember so I cannot share. How are the kids certain they saw RA? HOW certain are they on a scale of 1-10 with ten being absolute certainty?

Did they ask RA which kids he saw? Was he ever shown their faces or asked to describe them?

It’s likely RA saw the kids, and the kids saw him, but I’d like some more information before I hang him based on that alone.

No links… so examples only and MOOOO

Well, I am guessing they know who they saw because he is BG. So they would know from the visuals of the video that he was who they saw.


Then add in the fact RA seemingly saw the same group of girls. Also, not forgetting, he said in his first statement, he got to the trails at 1.30pm, I believe, and that’s literally when the girls would have seen him (within a few mins, give or take).

I personally have zero doubts that he saw those girls and they saw him that afternoon.


ALL MOOOOOOOOO

 

[SouthEnd]

Objectively, they saw someone. It’s possible they saw RA. We could even say likely since he reported that he saw some kids there as well. But how did they identify that it was specifically RA vs literally any other man who may have been lurking about that day? Did LE do some sort of lineup? Did they show the kids photos? If yes to either, were the men brought in / photos shown one by one or was a a group presented at the same time? What sort of questions did LE ask if the kids were asked to do a lineup? EG: did police say: who did you see that day (which implies the guy they saw IS in the lineup, even if he might not be and which is leading the witness). A lot of people have noted that RA looks a lot like any other guy - sometimes even like some of the other possible suspects that LE have discussed in public in the past, but who’s names I do not remember so I cannot share. How are the kids certain they saw RA? HOW certain are they on a scale of 1-10 with ten being absolute certainty?

Did they ask RA which kids he saw? Was he ever shown their faces or asked to describe them?

It’s likely RA saw the kids, and the kids saw him, but I’d like some more information before I hang him based on that alone.

No links… so examples only and MOOOO

I believe if there were positive photo line up IDs this will come out in trial.

Personally, I find eyewitness testimony of medium to low value because of many reasons that have been stated above but if BARD is a weight to be reached, they add to it (only if there was positive or non exclusionary identification)

HOWEVER. In my opinion and the opinion of prosecutors (anecdotally) a case gets weaker to prosecute the more time passes because memories: fade. Footage: gets written over. Phones: change and so on and so on. Witnesses: sadly pass away.

That's one of the reasons IMO the prosecution is very motivated to have the trial as soon as possible. Generally, a case gets weaker as time passes, not stronger.

 

[photographer4]

Well, I am guessing they know who they saw because he is BG. So they would know from the visuals of the video that he was who they saw.


Then add in the fact RA seemingly saw the same group of girls. Also, not forgetting, he said in his first statement, he got to the trails at 1.30pm, I believe, and that’s literally when the girls would have seen him (within a few mins, give or take).

I personally have zero doubts that he saw those girls and they saw him that afternoon.


ALL MOOOOOOOOO

Well they saw someone sure, but so far, seeing a guy at the trails who says he was at the trails that day… doesn’t make him BG. Makes him a dude at the trails that day. Hopefully there will be a really airtight case presented by the State to secure the conviction.

 

[photographer4]

I believe if there were positive photo line up IDs this will come out in trial.

Personally, I find eyewitness testimony of medium to low value because of many reasons that have been stated above but if BARD is a weight to be reached, they add to it (only if there was positive or non exclusionary identification)

HOWEVER. In my opinion and the opinion of prosecutors (anecdotally) a case gets weaker to prosecute the more time passes because memories: fade. Footage: gets written over. Phones: change and so on and so on. Witnesses: sadly pass away.

That's one of the reasons IMO the prosecution is very motivated to have the trial as soon as possible. Generally, a case gets weaker as time passes, not stronger.

I do agree with your post here. Memories fade, and that doesn’t even have to take years. I don’t really rely on lineups either after having learned that the research shows many flaws with them (no link, so moo, but one only has to google the reliability of police line ups to get more information).

 

[Salah11]

Well they saw someone sure, but so far, seeing a guy at the trails who says he was at the trails that day… doesn’t make him BG. Makes him a dude at the trails that day. Hopefully there will be a really airtight case presented by the State to secure the conviction.

Well it does when they are dressed the same and can be placed on the bridge moments before the girls crossed.

Also very conveniently his gun ejected a bullet at the place where two girls were murdered.

ETA- link to back up my claims - I would hate to break the rules and get reported.

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

 

[TTF14]

I believe he was (maybe still is) a conservation officer if I am not mistaken, so assume his work might take him to the Delphi area. But that is only an assumption on my part. also public records w IN DNR show him being given an award for something in 2007 and he was then stationed in district 3 which would include the Delphi area I believe.

The statement RA gave to DD in 2017 very early on in the case took place in a parking lot outside a local grocery, I am only assuming that took place in Delphi. I don't even think he was working the girls' case per se. He may have been pressed into assisting with LE in looking for witnesses in those early days but don't think he was actually part of the investigation.

from an article in 2022
Baldwin and Rozzi write that Allen gave a voluntary statement in February of 2017 to, “a Conservation Officer outside of the local grocery store,” detailing his presence on the Monon High Bridge the day Libby German and Abby Williams were murdered, that Allen was never contacted again by police . . .
https://fox59.com/indiana-news/defense-and-law-enforcement-spar-over-delphi-murders-investigation/

I think DD thought it was a big nothing, wrote up some notes, turned them over to the actual investigators and went on his merry way, never giving it another thought.

all of the above is JMO

I think he must have been working the case since he was on stage at the first big presser, no?

Photos of Dan Dulin, for comparison, can be seen here: Yard signs offered as way to show local support for law enforcement - Carroll County Comet and here: Log into Facebook

 

[SouthEnd]

Well it does when they are dressed the same and can be placed on the bridge moment before the girls crossed.


Also very conveniently his gun ejected a bullet at the place where two girls were murdered.

That's the combination of evidence that move the scale, IMO.

If I was the defence I'd be putting all my effort and energy into systematically going through all the evidence and trying to call them into question instead of prosecuting BH. JMO

 

[photographer4]

I

Yep I mean they can not even give him an alibi which speaks volumes on his innocents.

IMO

He can be factually innocent and still have an alibi that is hard to prove. Just ask Guy Paul Morin - who was home when his neighbor was abducted. His own mother confirmed his alibi and yet… he was STILL found guilty!! The story of Christine Jessop and Guy Paul Morin: One murder, two tragedies | Globalnews.ca

 

[TTF14]

Well it does when they are dressed the same and can be placed on the bridge moments before the girls crossed.

Also very conveniently his gun ejected a bullet at the place where two girls were murdered.

ETA- link to back up my claims - I would hate to break the rules and get reported.

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

BBM.

Yes, very convenient. And not even remotely proven yet.

IMO MOO

 

[photographer4]

That's the combination of evidence that move the scale, IMO.

If I was the defence I'd be putting all my effort and energy into systematically going through all the evidence and trying to call them into question instead of prosecuting BH. JMO

We agree here! I’d be finding whatever I could to show that RA left the area and went home (or wherever). This might be hard to find though (eg: like traffic cam footage? license plate scanners? A receipt from a store / gas station? Maybe a search he did on his PC that evening post getting home? How about a call or text to or from someone? How about a stock market check from his phone at the house? Maybe he went home and turned up the household heat manually from a device inside the home - anything????

I think unfortunately, he probably has no alibi (because he probably is some sort of guilty). Or he has one that is not easy to prove and the D haven’t been able to do so yet. What DOES he say he did after he left the trails?

 

[FrostedGlass]

The exact description of what RA said he was wearing, from the PCA for his arrest:

He told investigators that he was wearing blue jeans and blue or black
Carhartt jacket with hood. He advised he may have been wearing
some type of head covering as well.

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

 

[Salah11]

The exact description of what RA said he was wearing, from the PCA for his arrest:

He told investigators that he was wearing blue jeans and blue or black
Carhartt jacket with hood. He advised he may have been wearing
some type of head covering as well.

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

So dressed identical to BG in other words. Thats another big coincidence.

ETA - I forgot to mention he also coincidentally has the same overweight appearance and short stumpy legs.

IMHO

 

[FrostedGlass]

So dressed identical to BG in other words. Thats another big coincidence.

ETA - I forgot to mention he also coincidentally has the same overweight appearance and short stumpy legs.

IMHO

Not if he was wearing a black jacket with a hood. "May" have been wearing some type of head covering (or "may" not). He never said he was wearing a face covering.

BB didn't mention that the young guy with poofy hair she saw on the bridge wore a jacket with a hood.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I believe if there were positive photo line up IDs this will come out in trial.

Personally, I find eyewitness testimony of medium to low value because of many reasons that have been stated above but if BARD is a weight to be reached, they add to it (only if there was positive or non exclusionary identification)

HOWEVER. In my opinion and the opinion of prosecutors (anecdotally) a case gets weaker to prosecute the more time passes because memories: fade. Footage: gets written over. Phones: change and so on and so on. Witnesses: sadly pass away.

That's one of the reasons IMO the prosecution is very motivated to have the trial as soon as possible. Generally, a case gets weaker as time passes, not stronger.

It wouldn’t have been possible to do a police lineup for the witnesses in 2017. There was no suspect.

 

[SouthEnd]

It wouldn’t have been possible to do a police lineup for the witnesses in 2017. There was no suspect.

Oh 100% - I imagine they tried to do some line-ups every time they had a POI. The fact that they didn't just pull some photos of known criminals out of their... files and tried to point a thumb over the guy they liked the least (from what we know) gives me some hope for the case.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I think unfortunately, he probably has no alibi (because he probably is some sort of guilty)

Even if he’s only some sort of guilty in this case, if convicted, he will be sentenced as completely guilty.

It’s like pregnancy - there’s no ‘sort of’.
You are, or you aren’t.

jmo

 

[ClearAhead]

Not if he was wearing a black jacket with a hood. "May" have been wearing some type of head covering (or "may" not). He never said he was wearing a face covering.

BB didn't mention that the young guy with poofy hair she saw on the bridge wore a jacket with a hood.

I think it will be perceived positively when the recollect of the young people who saw the killer varies somewhat because it’s proof they haven’t colluded. If one thought she saw someone younger with poffy hair that does not discount the statements of the others. It’s quite normal for a group people to remember vastly differently, especially when at the time they had no way of knowing their recall would later become significant. MOO

 

[SouthEnd]

I think it will be perceived positively when the recollect of the young people who saw the killer varies somewhat because it’s proof they haven’t colluded. If one thought she saw someone younger with poffy hair that does not discount the statements of the others. It’s quite normal for a group people to remember vastly differently, especially when at the time they had no way of knowing their recall would later become significant. MOO

Exactly. Witness sightings are not be all end all, and IMO they shouldn't be. But they are evidence, and the fact that they naturally vary, as one would expect (I would challenge everyone to try to describe perfectly the single 'maybe slightly weird' dude you see in a hike) they will be taken into consideration by the jury alongside all other admisable pieces of evidence.

 

[TTF14]

I think it will be perceived positively when the recollect of the young people who saw the killer varies somewhat because it’s proof they haven’t colluded. If one thought she saw someone younger with poffy hair that does not discount the statements of the others. It’s quite normal for a group people to remember vastly differently, especially when at the time they had no way of knowing their recall would later become significant. MOO

While I agree that if they all gave exactly the same details it could spur on folks who think the girls colluded to tell some kind of lie (still haven't seen any kind of proof that is what anyone is alleging), I don't think all the differing descriptions will be "perceived positively." (IMO JMO MOO)

It's going to be a problem for the State.

IMO MOO

 

[SouthEnd]

While I agree that if they all gave exactly the same details it could spur on folks who think the girls colluded to tell some kind of lie (still haven't seen any kind of proof that is what anyone is alleging), I don't think all the differing descriptions will be "perceived positively." (IMO JMO MOO)

It's going to be a problem for the State.

IMO MOO

If I was the Prosecution/State, I would be presenting evidence of phones, cars, security cameras, to help the jury reach the conclusion that the only male present there was RA.
I would be asking the witnesses specifically if RA (hopefully photos of him back in the day) was definitely NOT the person they saw.

If I was the Defence, I would be trying to find a local to testify that there is x, y, z ways of getting to the bridge without passing by any security cameras, and without needing GPS/a phone that would be picked up. (Not present alt suspects, because then it would be very easy to just ask the witnesses, did this alt suspect look anything like the person you saw? No? Ok then. -> Jury shakes head)

All MO