Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #158

Status
Not open for further replies.

mrjitty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
7,937
Reaction score
56,883
It seems like LE solved this in spite of themselves and only because the perp decided to be as helpful as humanly possible. And even then, it doesn't sound like they have the strongest case in the world yet. "The interpretation of identification is subjective in nature" is not a phrase I want preceding the one test that ties my defendant to the crime scene. At least RA helpfully ruled out all the other explanations as to why a bullet of his would be there. But I hope they do a better job preparing their expert witnesses than they did investigating this case.

RSBM

I suspect that is boiler plate text for the expert examination. It just says this type of analysis includes both objective and subjective elements.
 

Havingacrisis

Active Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2022
Messages
16
Reaction score
232
who is the other guy in black? This is not good for the state
There is no other guy in black. It’s very easy to mistake the colour of clothing, especially in full sun weather.

The witness said all black, that’s key because it is monochromatic. Something as simple as being backlit will make all blue look very similar to all black. And witnesses perspective is obviously bound to have variations
 

asyousay

On Time Out
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
6,221
Reaction score
19,396
I have no doubt it’s him because it’s funny how he claimed he only went to the first platform and turned around and sat on a bench.

Then you have an adult female who can place him on the first platform but she turned around and continued her walk. So he knew he could only be placed on that first platform so he has admitted to that as he knows he can’t deny it.


He admits stuff he know he can’t deny
IMO
 

mrjitty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
7,937
Reaction score
56,883
I think the PCA explains the charging strategy.

The evidence against RA is bad - especially his damaging admissions (LOL). I guarantee his complete police interview is a train wreck. By charging murder under the codified 'felony murder' extensions, the prosecution can walk in an open door. They have Bridge Guy doing the kidnapping on video. They have the photos of the murder scene proving murder happened in the kidnapping transaction.

Therefore the only live issue is the identity of Bridge Guy, which the offender has helpfully admitted, and provided the critical evidence against himself.

This strategy cuts off the "SODDI" defence quite nicely IMO.

The best defence is to try to blame the other suspects whom after all, were fancied by law enforcement, and in a huge coincidence, were catfishing one of the victims. Surely a jury will suspect involvement!

However that does not matter so much given the charge, because clearly it is hard for the defence to argue Catfish Guy is Bridge Guy now. Even if catfish guy was somehow there, it doesn't matter.

If RA had thrown away the gun and not done that interview, he likely would have got away with this.
 

mrjitty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
7,937
Reaction score
56,883
I have no doubt it’s him because it’s funny how he claimed he only went to the first platform and turned around and sat on a bench.

Then you have an adult female who can place him on the first platform but she turned around and continued her walk. So he knew he could only be placed on that first platform so he has admitted to that as he knows he can’t deny it.


He admits stuff he know he can’t deny
IMO

Going down to the police station to admit you were the bridge guy a witness saw is criminal genius.
 

Davemac1

Active Member
Joined
May 10, 2020
Messages
18
Reaction score
157
There seems to be a degree of planning in what happened. One witness mentioned the guy they saw was marching with purpose. They were juvenile witnesses, so why not stop and stalk/attack them if it was a matter of just turning up and finding the right prey?
No. The meeting with the girls had been pre arranged imo.
However,things started going off plan pretty much after the meet happened. Maybe because there was two of them, he was expecting one? Controlling them proved difficult? They put up a much harder fight?
Either way, lead to him being clumsy.

Not finding or being aware of Libby's phone.
Dropping a bullet at the scene.
Being spotted by multiple witnesses.

You would have to think due to the nature of how things panned out and the disarray that appears to have developed, that the crime scene would be dripping in DNA .

The problem is, do we have any confidence in the hapless Indiana state police finding it?
 

Lisams83

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2021
Messages
9
Reaction score
52
Oh my goodness....
I've been too wrapped up in the wagner case to know this has all been released...from the UK too so timing doesn't make it easy to to catch up.

I don't understand why this took so long.
Also don't understand the unspent round and that it cycled through RAs gun.
Could someone explain that to me please....i don't have a lot of knowledge regarding guns because we only have them for hunting here.
I get that they match them when they find a spent bullet but don't understand how they match unspent bullets. Hope that makes.
 

Vern

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
9,608
...

If RA had thrown away the gun and not done that interview, he likely would have got away with this.
RSBM

Not if his fingerprint(s) (or trace DNA) also happen to be on that round. That round was handled at least once, to load it into the weapon. Whether it was extracted accidently, say during a struggle with one of the girls or while striking one of them with the weapon, or whether it fell from a pocket etc, the fact it was handled at least once increases the odds that an identifiable fingerprint or ... trace DNA was left and therefore found, at the scene of the crime which can now be positively linked to suspect. I think his biggest mistake was leaving - or not knowing he left - that round at the scene. The trial will tell.

There have been rumours that DNA was found so this is possible IMO should that rumour be true.
 

asyousay

On Time Out
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
6,221
Reaction score
19,396
There seems to be a degree of planning in what happened. One witness mentioned the guy they saw was marching with purpose. They were juvenile witnesses, so why not stop and stalk/attack them if it was a matter of just turning up and finding the right prey?
No. The meeting with the girls had been pre arranged imo.
However,things started going off plan pretty much after the meet happened. Maybe because there was two of them, he was expecting one? Controlling them proved difficult? They put up a much harder fight?
Either way, lead to him being clumsy.

Not finding or being aware of Libby's phone.
Dropping a bullet at the scene.
Being spotted by multiple witnesses.

You would have to think due to the nature of how things panned out and the disarray that appears to have developed, that the crime scene would be dripping in DNA .

The problem is, do we have any confidence in the hapless Indiana state police finding it?





I still don’t believe it was planned but I can see why some think it was.


I would hazard a guess and say it’s hard enough to kidnap 2 girls and control them but 3 on a busy walking path would have been insanity .


He corned them in a secluded spot where he knew nobody would be and got them off the trail straight away.


He could never of done that with the 3 juvenile witnesses without being caught straight away.



Also walking with purpose could just mean he had had a really crap day and wanted to walk off some steam. Why on earth would he want to interact with young girls would be my argument in court?!
 

Curiousobserver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2018
Messages
2,048
Reaction score
22,366
It seems that almost everything in the PCA document is information they had back in 2017.

It was presumably too weak to charge him then. And presumably it was too weak to obtain a search warrant until recently. Something changed during the October interview.

I would guess they had the bullet from the crime scene, it was not the murder weapon, or even fired, and they had no reasonable cause to search RA's property for a weapon matching the bullet.

Then on October 13th they re-interviewed him (and/or his wife) and got him to admit he owned a gun, possibly even one of the same bullet type. That might have tipped the scales enough to obtain the search warrant. To obtain a search warrant you have to specify what you are looking for, where you will look, and explain why it is reasonable to expect to find evidence there that is linked to the crime.

Then the search turned up the gun. Then they matched the gun to the bullet forensically. That would be the first evidence they had that circumstantially placed him at the scene of the crime, not just on the bridge or walking away.

That would seem to explain why they could not arrest him in 2017 and why the PCA is just barely different now, and just barely enough to arrest him now.

I disagree with those who presume they had a bunch more evidence at the time they arrested him. And the statements from his defense attorney suggest they have not yet revealed more evidence such as murder weapon, DNA, clothing, blood, etc.

However, it remains possible that further searches after his arrest could uncover more direct evidence. They will want more evidence to assure a conviction.
I think this is the real story here. We know he did it. LE should have been able to get a warrant to search and check for ownership of guns on a man that admitted to being at or near the crime scene and was probably observed by three people, one of which said he was muddy and bloody. The bullet evidence is the weakest part of this case since gun parts are made in factories where every part is almost identical to the next one these "unique" marks are easily challenged. My prediction is it won't be the thing a jury convicts him on.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top