Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #192

[girlhasnoname]

If they had gotten the gun and bullets tossed out, that would have eliminated a large part of this case. It's too bad the judge chose not to hold a hearing on the FM.

There's much more to this case agains Rick than the gun and bullet. The largest part of the case is RA placing himself there at the time of the murders, wearing almost identical clothing, looking just the little guy on Libby's video, his confessions, etc. Then of course there is the information we don't even know of yet, mainly the entire State's case.

A Judge can rule on a Motions without a hearing it happens all the time in courts all over, if not, nobody would ever get to trial.

IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Since early on, I have been wondering how much RA knows/understands re: the legal options he has available.

I am not doubting his mental capabilities to stand trial. However, there were warning bells ringing for me since he penned this letter from jail asking for a public attorney - Delphi murders suspect Richard Allen pens jailhouse letter saying wife is in hiding

A few observations:
a) He had no idea how expensive a defence attorney would be. A lot of the defendants we encounter in True Crime are well-versed in the legal system, either because they are career criminals, or because they are true crime enthusiasts (BK Idaho) or they are mega millionaires who have the best teams advising them. RA is a unique case - he seems to have never had a brush with the law and his job/everyday life didn't prepare him for the bureaucratic nature of the system. I just want to highlight how intimidating this can be - I had to deal with civil legislation in two different countries and even though I have dealt with legal matters at my work, it still felt extremely overwhelming.

Speaking of overwhelming...

b) He comes across desperate. Guilty or innocent, he seems in over his head, which is entirely understandable. But that level of desperation and lack of understanding of the system, plus a history of depression, can lead to a person refusing to engage/understand the process if they think it is hopeless anyways.

c) He keeps bringing up his wife. Yes, he seems worried about himself, but reading the letter he seems absolutely torn over his wife. Not daughter/mother, but mostly his wife. We know that Dr Wala testified about RA's bond with his wife, it is interesting (and honestly, heart-breaking) to see he is willing to beg not for himself, but for her.

Why am I bringing this up?

MOO: I believe that RA has less understanding of the legal system than most people who engage in conversation in this forum, and even for us, the whole process would be overwhelming. That, coupled with what the DT said in the FM about how RA refused to engage at times and help his own defence, makes me wonder if RA is fully informed on what is happening. Does he understand his options? Does he realise he can plea? Does he fully understand what will come out during trial?

I am not accusing his DT of not informing him, I am simply wondering if he is making sensible decisions atm vs reacting out of desperation and taking the path of least resistance, even though it will cause much more heartache later on.

All MOO

I believe it's an act mostly, and a combination of some depression, as it's been stated he's had it over his lifetime, codependency, and GUILT.

RA was quite functional and productive in society before he had his 'psychosis'. Hiding in plain sight for 5+ years, he held up quite well IMO.

 

[katydid23]

Brilliant attorneys not only preparing for this trial, but possible appeal.

What are the realistic chances of an appeal overturning a Guilty Verdict?

If you are appealing a criminal conviction, or otherwise in prison, your chances of winning anything are much lower. This year, the circuit reversed about 5% of criminal cases, which is unusually low–the circuit’s average is around 10

​

​

Reversal Rates In The Sixth Circuit And Elsewhere​

By Colter Paulson on May 31, 2023POSTED IN NEWS AND ANALYSIS
This post provides the latest statistics for a question we are frequently asked: what is the chance of obtaining a reversal on appeal. Private civil cases see the most reversals of any category at 13.4%, followed by appeals in bankruptcy and civil appeals involving the United States at 12.5%. In other words, the circuit reverses about once for every seven or eight cases involving private plaintiffs. If you are appealing a criminal conviction, or otherwise in prison, your chances of winning anything are much lower. This year, the circuit reversed about 5% of criminal cases, which is unusually low–the circuit’s average is around 10%. Prisoners and habeas plaintiffs (who often labor under difficult standards of review) prevail in one-in-twelve to one-in-twenty appeals.

Reversal Rates In The Sixth Circuit And Elsewhere

This post provides the latest statistics for a question we are frequently asked: what is the chance of obtaining a reversal on appeal. Private civil

www.sixthcircuitappellateblog.com

 

[girlhasnoname]

Sorry I wasn’t clear. The real fight for a client typically occurs in the courtroom, attempting for it to result in a not guilty verdict. This one doesn’t seem to be moving in that direction at all. After dismissing four repetitive Franks Motions, she’s going to agree to a violation of the 6th amendment? I think not. I predict where it’s going from here, her decisions will be appealed once again postponing the October trial.
MOO and JMO

This Defense has been doing their 'fighting' for their client in SM with the YTers, Tweeters and internet hacks, even with a gag order in place. Why? Because they don't have a real defense so they have to complain, blame and stall.

Unfortunately, Judge Gull should have DQ'd them procedurally correct in the beginning and we wouldn't be on this bizarro clown train right now. Hard lesson learned for her I'm sure. (I think she was trying to help Rozzi and Baldwin save public face, big mistake)

I don't think the D will be granted another appeal by the Indiana Supreme Court. I bet they're kicking their own behinds for reinstating R&B as they've shown professional misconduct from the day they were appointed. They've been lying all this time saying they were ready for trial back in January, I do wonder if they've even read through Discovery yet.

JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Regarding LE checking the HHS video for time accuracy:

They did check the video at the transfer station when they were checking on RL's alibi. It's stated the video appears to be off by 26 minutes. If they checked for correct times for RL, I would hope they would do the same in RA's case.

It's in the PCA, item 17.

LOGAN WARRANT final_Redacted.pdf

et he rS de. ur M. et he rS de. ur M. et he rS de. ur M. ...

www.docdroid.net

 

[girlhasnoname]

Appealing based on ineffective counsel is certainly a strategy…

RA can't appeal on ineffective council, that was one of the understandings when RA agreed upon reinstating Rozzi & Baldwin as his attorneys of choice in the SCOI ruling.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

What would make it a negative thing in your mind (or anyone’s mind) if she had opted to hold the hearing on it? I am confused. Do we not want RA to have a fair trial? Should the trial not be based on facts and evidence that lead to his arrest in the first place? If the LE was untruthful or twisted things or omitted things to get their SW, why wouldn’t we want to know about it via a hearing? People complain the D does these things; twists things/mistates things etc - wouldn’t it be good to make them dance and watch them squirm in a hearing?

In order to attain a hearing for a legal motion, you need to make some strong legal points to reach a certain standard. They failed to do so. You cannot just make blanket accusations and expect to have a hearing set up for you.

None of the Franks Motions rose to that required level. There was nothing put forth that justified a legal hearing. The Judge already explained in previous rulings what the issues were but the D just kept hammering the same issues that have already been repeatedly denied.

The D was unsuccessful in offering any credible evidence that LE was untruthful or distorted any facts. You don't get a hearing without offering potential evidence of those things. And they still have not been able to point to anything credible.

I don't need to watch the D dance around and squirm during a hearing---I'll see that enough when the trial starts.

 

[katydid23]

IMO if the state puts them on the stand, then they’re fair game to the D team. I would rip them to shreds if I were RA’s lawyer. It’s not their job to worry about the mental anguish of the witnesses imo. Their only worry is RA. The jury may not like it. But that’s always a risk. You can’t always accomplish the task without risking making someone upset. IMO if a witness falls apart on the stand, if their testimony falls down with them, then I’m ok with that. A strong witness can still fall apart and be emotional but their statement won’t change and they’ll rebuke any suggestions by counsel that they didn’t see what they think or said they did.

And if those witnesses were young girls that are now coming forward to testify? You think the D should rip them to shreds?

 

[Willow Knight]

If they had gotten the gun and bullets tossed out, that would have eliminated a large part of this case. It's too bad the judge chose not to hold a hearing on the FM.

Yes, getting evidence thrown out would, IMO, affect the case. What would this world be like for children and young teens should 'evidence' not be able to be presented in a trial? How many would be safe if defense could simply get evidence of murder thrown out? All these murderers walking around free because evidence is thrown out. There was no reason for a hearing, a gun was found at Richard Allen's home that matched a bullet from the crime scene. Why, why would that get thrown out? Why shouldn't a jury hear it?

So, get eye witness thrown out, get Richard Allen's statement that he was there during the window thrown out, get the video of him on the bridge thrown out, get his confessions thrown out, get his bullet and gun thrown out. What about Libby and Abby?

 

[FrostedGlass]

There's much more to this case agains Rick than the gun and bullet. The largest part of the case is RA placing himself there at the time of the murders, wearing almost identical clothing, looking just the little guy on Libby's video, his confessions, etc. Then of course there is the information we don't even know of yet, mainly the entire State's case.

A Judge can rule on a Motions without a hearing it happens all the time in courts all over, if not, nobody would ever get to trial.

IMO

I said it was a large part; not the only part.

There are 2 versions of his time at the trails, there are multiple versions of what a man was seen wearing, many people thought poor RL looked just like the little guy on Libby's video, a person must have been out of his mind to make that many confessions. IMO we've already seen most of the State's case.

To this day, the image of fitting RL into RA's little jeans and boots cracks me up.

IMO this judge should do everything possible to show she is not biased.

 

[Salah11]

I said it was a large part; not the only part.

There are 2 versions of his time at the trails, there are multiple versions of what a man was seen wearing, many people thought poor RL looked just like the little guy on Libby's video, a person must have been out of his mind to make that many confessions. IMO we've already seen most of the State's case.

To this day, the image of fitting RL into RA's little jeans and boots cracks me up.

IMO this judge should do everything possible to show she is not biased.

She isn’t and it’s only a select few who claim she is because she isn’t playing the Defense’s games.

This is why she wasn’t struck from the case even though the defense wanted it. She is very well respected from her peers IMO

 

[katydid23]

So long as it fits and isn’t *forced to fit*. The ISP website says around 1pm. That’s not been changed so I’m not sure why they’re stating it now as something totally different?! That’s one massive discrepancy imo. If they were dropped off around 1pm then the whole timeline the state wants people to believe is off.

However we KNOW they were not dropped off at 1 pm. That was an early estimation on a general website----NOT a trial ready source for an evidential timeline. You can't make a determination that it is a 'massive discrepancy.'

It actually sounds like something this defense team would put in a motion---saying they found a massive discrepancy in the LE's timeline, but basing it on an online website for general info about the missing girls. IMO, THAT is misleading.

 

[m00c0w]

I said it was a large part; not the only part.

There are 2 versions of his time at the trails, there are multiple versions of what a man was seen wearing, many people thought poor RL looked just like the little guy on Libby's video, a person must have been out of his mind to make that many confessions. IMO we've already seen most of the State's case.

To this day, the image of fitting RL into RA's little jeans and boots cracks me up.

IMO this judge should do everything possible to show she is not biased.

Allowing a Franks hearing based on misinformation, distortion of facts, and sheer speculation would be quite biased.

MOO

 

[justtrish]

That is a very good way to explain the preferred process. Build a wall of facts, brick by brick and see what develops.

I agree that RA seeing the 3 girls and them seeing RA is powerful circumstantial evidence.

Then, we can add it to Libby's video, taken of BG walking towards them. Then , reportedly, we will hear a male voice saying" Guys, Down The Hill", and we will also hear Abby say 'He has a GUN' ...

I think that ^^ is enough to prove that BG is the killer, or at very least, the kidnapper.

P will have to show clear evidence that RA=BG. I do think they will be able to by process of elimination and the confessions and maybe the bullet evidence?

Some swear that they have DNA evidence, but I can't believe nothing has leaked, so IDK.

BBM - The defense isn't leaking things that make their client look guilty, they only seem to leak the things they want to paint in their clients favor. His confessions that don't line up with the crime, the crime scene photos, the photos of "runes" minus the explaination that this very well could be a dying girls last action while living.. It always is the things they can twist into something favorable for their client that they want leaked. The state has remain tight lipped and has only released things that are absolutely necessary. I think it is possible they have DNA.

 

[katydid23]

My post was in response to someone else who shared a link stating the matter is not settled as the D had filed something else regarding the franks being denied without hearing. I wonder if the D will take this matter over JG’s head? Who’s higher? The Supreme Court? I wonder if this will be delayed again - this time because JG refuses to actually settle it. With a hearing.

It is settled. She is not legally required to have a hearing if she has legal justification for her ruling to deny one. The matter is settled.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Regarding LE checking the HHS video for time accuracy:

They did check the video at the transfer station when they were checking on RL's alibi. It's stated the video appears to be off by 26 minutes. If they checked for correct times for RL, I would hope they would do the same in RA's case.

It's in the PCA, item 17.

LOGAN WARRANT final_Redacted.pdf

et he rS de. ur M. et he rS de. ur M. et he rS de. ur M. ...

www.docdroid.net

Is HHS the same as the transfer station #17 - I thought the transfer station was a dump?

If LE checked for RL who was never arrested or charged with the murders of Abby & Libby, I feel confident the camera at HHS was checked and timed correctly give a minute or two either way for RA's case.

JMO

 

[Willow Knight]

What an awful notion! That 12 random people get to decide one’s fate based on whatever a judge says they’re allowed to hear about / know about from either side. What a scary thought that 12 people must decide if you’re guilty or not instead of the facts deciding it.

Just because 12 people say you did it, doesn’t ever mean you did. Even the reverse is true. Just ask OJ. You could be perfectly innocent but if 12 people don’t believe you are… Welp. Sorry about your luck!

A judge decides what is relevant and what are presentable facts. A judge does not simply pick and choose on a wimp. If something is not relevant to the case it should be limited, same as facts of the case. Facts should related to the case and backed by evidence directly related to the crime.

In this case it is who killed Libby and Abby.

 

[katydid23]

I get why some people think this but I kinda like their tenacity! I like that they have continued to mount a vigorous defense and that they’ve taken issue with JG refusing to have a franks hearing. Moo.

It's not a vigorous defense. They are just spinning their wheels now. It would be considered a vigorous defense if they had pivoted with each motion and brought up different, more relevant legal arguments each time. But they kept throwing back the same unsuccessful, dead end arguments. They were wasting time and energy, not putting up a vigorous defense, IMO.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Allowing a Franks hearing based on misinformation, distortion of facts, and sheer speculation would be quite biased.

MOO

I feel like there is misinformation and distorted facts on both sides.

Allowing both sides to present their facts seems fair to me. She should hear them, make a ruling and put her opinion on record. Just make it a done deal. That would put balance to any idea that she is biased against RA.

MOO

 

[tlcya]

From my understanding and going on holiday in America, they don’t like walking anywhere
[snipped]

I resemble this remark so I'm not mad at it