Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #162

[FrostedGlass]

I've had no success in finding out exactly what info comes out in an omnibus hearing in Carroll Co., IN. The best I found is this from Arizona; the article discusses other motions, too.

The omnibus date is Feb 17; somewhere I read that RA's attys are expecting to have all discovery by the end of this week. That gives them a week to review and present anything that's missing to the judge on the 17th.

"issues of discovery that might remain in the case—parties might want disclosure of lab reports or the criminal history of the witnesses that might testify at trial or maybe there is some missing evidence that the prosecutor hasn't given them yet."

https://www.hamplaw.com/omnibus-hearing

 

[mrjitty]

Well it is interesting that after all the big talk of weak evidence by the defence, they remain in no particular hurry to try and get him out on bail.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Well it is interesting that after all the big talk of weak evidence by the defence, they remain in no particular hurry to try and get him out on bail.

You seem to be very knowledgeable; did you think he actually would before seeing what prosecution has?

 

[Justice101]

You seem to be very knowledgeable; did you think he actually would before seeing what prosecution has?

I roll my eyes when I hear defense attorney's first statements.... The bottom line is 95% of subjects being arrested either take a plea deal or are found guilty by a judge or jury. In general, the police arrest the right person the vast majority of the time.

 

[MistyWaters]

I roll my eyes when I hear defense attorney's first statements.... The bottom line is 95% of subjects being arrested either take a plea deal or are found guilty by a judge or jury. In general, the police arrest the right person the vast majority of the time.

And regardless of the defence’s posturing, I think it’d be highly unlikely a Judge presiding over a bail hearing would move away from a No bail ruling to suddenly deeming the evidence to be weak, considering it was enough to support an arrest.

Isn’t that the purpose of a Preliminary Hearing, whereby if evidence is insufficient the charges would be simply be dropped, no bail required? Can’t seem to find the date for the Preliminary Hearing, anybody know when it’s scheduled for?

 

[Betty P]

Perhaps the reason for delay is RA’s lawyer thinks RA’s chances are better after (if) this bill gets passed by the Senate, arguing that evidence isn’t strong enough to keep him behind bars plus he poses no substantial risk to the public.

Proposal seeks to change Constitution — and who has right to bail in Indiana - Indiana Capital Chronicle

Prosecutors say Sen. Eric Koch's bail bill would keep dangerous people off the streets, while defenders and civil rights advocates say it could endanger arrestees' rights.

indianacapitalchronicle.com

“A Bedford Republican wants to change who has the right to bail in Indiana — and it will mean editing the state’s Constitution to make it happen….

…..In Indiana now, only people accused of murder or treason can’t get bail, as long as there’s enough proof….

……So he worked “with Indiana prosecutors” to draw up SJR 1. Koch’s proposal would let judges deny bail to anyone that they believe — based on “strong” evidence — “poses a substantial risk to the public.”

Pardon, I'm a little confused by this argument. RA is accused of murder, so its legal for a judge to deny him bail. Why would legislation be needed?

 

[FrostedGlass]

Pardon, I'm a little confused by this argument. RA is accused of murder, so its legal for a judge to deny him bail. Why would legislation be needed?

From the article you quoted: "In Indiana now, only people accused of murder or treason can’t get bail, as long as there’s enough proof."

I believe RA's attorney was saying there was not enough proof in the PCA to keep him locked up. I don't know if he had seen actual evidence when he made that statement,

 

[FrostedGlass]

And regardless of the defence’s posturing, I think it’d be highly unlikely a Judge presiding over a bail hearing would move away from a No bail ruling to suddenly deeming the evidence to be weak, considering it was enough to support an arrest.

Isn’t that the purpose of a Preliminary Hearing, whereby if evidence is insufficient the charges would be simply be dropped, no bail required? Can’t seem to find the date for the Preliminary Hearing, anybody know when it’s scheduled for?

Here:

10/28/2022

Order on Initial Hearing Judicial Officer: Diener, Benjamin A. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles

 

[MistyWaters]

Here:

10/28/2022

Order on Initial Hearing Judicial Officer: Diener, Benjamin A. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles

I‘m just not seeing anything relating to a Preliminary Hearing date, which I understand would take the place of a Grand Jury, who did not hear this case. I don’t know maybe the Preliminary Hearing was waived in this same filing but it’s odd MSM is mum on the topic.

02/07/2023

Motion for Continuance Filed DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE BAIL HEARING AND JURY TRIAL SETTING Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 02/07/2023

 

[FrostedGlass]

I looked through some of the murder cases I follow and there are no dates that I found for preliminary hearings. Apparently IN does not note them in the public version of MyCase.

I did find this simple explanation of those hearings in the link below.

When law enforcement has good reason to believe that a person has committed a crime, this is called “probable cause.” For this reason, it is common for a preliminary hearing to occur before a person is charged with a crime... Prosecution will build a case against a suspected defendant, and then bring it to a judge for approval to move forward with filing formal charges against the defendant.

What is a Preliminary Hearing? | INDIANAPOLIS CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER

www.delewislaw.com

 

[MistyWaters]

I looked through some of the murder cases I follow and there are no dates that I found for preliminary hearings. Apparently IN does not note them in the public version of MyCase.

I did find this simple explanation of those hearings in the link below.

What is a Preliminary Hearing? | INDIANAPOLIS CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER

www.delewislaw.com

I appreciate your looking that up. So without a Grand Jury hearing it appears the Judge reviewing the Probable Cause Affidavit and as a result, authorizing the arrest, is what’s referred to as a Preliminary Hearing. ???

 

[FrostedGlass]

I appreciate your looking that up. So without a Grand Jury hearing it appears the Judge reviewing the Probable Cause Affidavit and as a result, authorizing the arrest, is what’s referred to as a Preliminary Hearing. ???

That's what I got from reading the article. As you've probably already guessed, it's out of my realm of expertise. Is that how it reads to you?

 

[MistyWaters]

That's what I got from reading the article. As you've probably already guessed, it's out of my realm of expertise. Is that how it reads to you?

That makes two of us out of our realm, but yes that’s how it reads to me.

 

[steeltowngirl]

RA trial dates now showing as cancelled. I guess we are awaiting the rescheduled dates.

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

03/20/2023

Jury Trial Session: 03/20/2023 9:00 AM, Rescheduled Session: 03/21/2023 9:00 AM, Cancelled Session: 03/22/2023 9:00 AM, Cancelled Session: 03/23/2023 9:00 AM, Cancelled Session: 03/24/2023 9:00 AM, Cancelled Session: 03/20/2023 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Session: 03/21/2023 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Session: 03/22/2023 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Session: 03/23/2023 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Session: 03/24/2023 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Comment: First Setting

 

[sandy_80]

Thank you for the link and it was indeed interesting. Based on MS's commentary, in addition to what JH said at the 2018 CrimeCon, where he describes how the first sketch came about, I have some new thoughts.

If the "muddy and bloody" witness came forward in 5/17 and was able to describe somebody who matched the person other witnesses had seen, plus matched L's video, it would have completed not only the timeframe for the killer's presence near the trail, but it would have been the only sighting of the man after the murders. We don't know how LE verified her sighting, other than her vehicle being captured on the HH camera just before 4pm, but by that time, they seemingly had other witnesses. I think each consecutive witness helped confirm the veracity of the other witnesses' statements, which would have especially helped add weight to witnesses whose statements might have otherwise been questioned, such as juveniles. JMO.

JH's description of how the first sketch came about is in this link:
Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights

id like to disagree that it wouldn't be the only sighting after the murders
the number of actual witnesses stays unknown, but at least the male from the arguing couple saw him after the murders...I dont buy how he tried to distance himself afterwards cause he was harassed by the internet and podcasts
but i think he wasnt a MAIN witness ...interestingly all ur main witnesses are females

 

[mrjitty]

And regardless of the defence’s posturing, I think it’d be highly unlikely a Judge presiding over a bail hearing would move away from a No bail ruling to suddenly deeming the evidence to be weak, considering it was enough to support an arrest.

Isn’t that the purpose of a Preliminary Hearing, whereby if evidence is insufficient the charges would be simply be dropped, no bail required? Can’t seem to find the date for the Preliminary Hearing, anybody know when it’s scheduled for?

There was speculation that the bail hearing would run with the prelim, as they cover the same ground.

 

[dm799]

I roll my eyes when I hear defense attorney's first statements.... The bottom line is 95% of subjects being arrested either take a plea deal or are found guilty by a judge or jury. In general, the police arrest the right person the vast majority of the time.

Do you mean subjects being charged rather than arrested? If you do mean arrested you're way off.

 

[TL4S]

id like to disagree that it wouldn't be the only sighting after the murders
the number of actual witnesses stays unknown, but at least the male from the arguing couple saw him after the murders...I dont buy how he tried to distance himself afterwards cause he was harassed by the internet and podcasts
but i think he wasnt a MAIN witness ...interestingly all ur main witnesses are females

You're right, if there are any other witnesses, we don't know about them. I understand people will interpret the below differently, like that under the bridge is not officially "the trail," but the PCA does say this:

Through interviews, electronic data, photographs, and video from the Hoosier Harvestore investigators determined that there were other people on the trail that day after 2:13p.m. Those people were interviewed and none of those individuals encountered the male subject referenced above, witnessed by the juvenile girls, and further none of those individuals witnessed Victim 1 and Victim 2.

In regards to the arguing couple and the man, I've read several accounts of this, but nothing definite. I don't really know if it's rumor or truth, and if true, what truth it is.

 

[Prime8]

When I look back on what FBI profiler John Douglas said about the case it is ironic. John Douglas said, "You don't wake up one day and commit a double homicide like this."

I know statistically speaking, that it is unlikely Richard Allen is innocent. There is the toolmark evidence on the unspent round placing him at the scene of the crime. But if somehow Richard Allen were innocent, the one question I would like to ask an FBI profiler is whether or not they think the real killer would be following the case now that someone else has been arrested for their crime?

I like John Douglas but he's very much a dinosaur at this point; I don't think he's caught up with modern criminal behavior profiling. It's not to say he doesn't have good instincts, but sometimes people just don't keep up. It's changing rapidly, especially with genetic genealogy. The notion that no one just goes out and commits a crime is falling by the way-side. Cases of murders by a stranger have a pretty low solve rate so it's a small, and probably homogenous sample size that profilers work from. He's correct in that I don't think people just wake up one day and decide to murder having never thought about it before. But I do think that people spend a lot of time fantasizing about horrible things. So maybe he got up that day and decided today was the day he was going to do the thing he'd been thinking about and planning for 15 years. We really just don't know at this point.

 

[somequestions]

I like John Douglas but he's very much a dinosaur at this point; I don't think he's caught up with modern criminal behavior profiling. It's not to say he doesn't have good instincts, but sometimes people just don't keep up. It's changing rapidly, especially with genetic genealogy. The notion that no one just goes out and commits a crime is falling by the way-side. Cases of murders by a stranger have a pretty low solve rate so it's a small, and probably homogenous sample size that profilers work from. He's correct in that I don't think people just wake up one day and decide to murder having never thought about it before. But I do think that people spend a lot of time fantasizing about horrible things. So maybe he got up that day and decided today was the day he was going to do the thing he'd been thinking about and planning for 15 years. We really just don't know at this point.

I agree that you should not come to conclusions based on a profile. In hindsight, much of what profiler John Douglas said was wrong.

I was surprised by this case. I thought the killer would probably be someone who has done this before too.