IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #167

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know.

Either do I, why I’m wondering if the error occurred when transcribing the originals by an admin not filling in or checking all the boxes. I can’t think of any court case dependant on how thoroughly or accurately documents are completed. Instead it‘s typically addressed by trial testimony of various officers who were involved in the search.
 
I am still reading. A few questions:

Were any eyewitness given a line up that included RA and other people who looked similar to RA? (p. 110-113)

RA’s wife stated he had “guns and knives”. It appears numerous knives were collected, did he have more than one gun? If so, would they typically only retrieve one of the guns in his possession?

Did they get a warrant for RA’s phone since they said they believed he was on his phone on the bridge per eye witnesses? (p. 115)

Did they only find a total of (19) .40 cal bullets (9 in one mag, 8 in another mag, one in a keepsake box, and one in the chamber of the gun)? (p. 116)
* No line up that I'm aware of.
* We don't know how many guns he had. I don't know how they settle on the number of items to take. Can that bullet only be shot from the type of gun he took? (see below)
* They took a bunch of phones
* I think the ones listed are the only ones they took. (Plus the one from the scene.)

I looked up my own question:
Other 40 Cal. Pistol Options:
  • Beretta 96A1.
  • Walther PPQ M2.
  • Springfield XD .40.
  • Beretta Px4 Storm.
  • SIG P226/P229.
  • Walther P99.
 
* No line up that I'm aware of.
* We don't know how many guns he had. I don't know how they settle on the number of items to take. Can that bullet only be shot from the type of gun he took? (see below)
* They took a bunch of phones
* I think the ones listed are the only ones they took. (Plus the one from the scene.)

I looked up my own question:
Other 40 Cal. Pistol Options:
  • Beretta 96A1.
  • Walther PPQ M2.
  • Springfield XD .40.
  • Beretta Px4 Storm.
  • SIG P226/P229.
  • Walther P99.
Unless I’m missing something, the only gun collected in the Search Warrant Affidavit was the SIG Sauer P226 (which would use .40 cal cartridges) (p. 116, item# MC8). They also collected a case for this gun and 18 additional cartridges. According to the Probable Cause Affidavit “Among other items, officers located jackets, boots, knives and firearms, including a SIG Sauer, Model P226, .40 caliber pistol with serial number U 625 627.” (p. 5, PCA). Does anyone know the other gun(s) collected/can you tell me where it lists the other gun(s)? I re-read a few times but can’t seem to find it.

According to Wikipedia, “The .40 S&W is a rimless pistol cartridgedeveloped jointly by American firearmsmanufacturers Smith & Wesson and Winchesterin 1990.[3] The .40 S&W was developed as a law enforcement cartridge designed to duplicate performance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) reduced-velocity 10mm Autocartridge which could be retrofitted into medium-frame (9 mm size) semi-automatic handguns.


I don’t know much about ballistics, but it in cases I’m aware of where bullets were used as primary evidence in a homicide case, they have been spent rounds at the crime scene. Does anyone know of any cases where an unspent bullet(s) were used to identify a specific individual’s gun?

Does anyone know how ballistics could prove 1 unspent .40 cal S&W round specifically fell out of a SIG P226 and not one of the other gun types (I.e. Beretta 96A1, Walther PPQ M2, Springfield XD .40, Beretta Px4 Storm, or a Walther P99)? If there are light identifying marks from racking that would identify a SIG P226 as the gun, would they be enough to distinguish a specific individual’s SIG P226? How many SIG Sauer P226s are registered in the area? It’s very possible the prosecution has more evidence re: the bullet. For example, maybe there was a partial fingerprint on the unspent bullet that could match to RA?
 
Thanks for your thoughtful post. Your views are always interesting.

Attorney Shay Hughes aka Hoosier Public Defender put out a couple of X twitter posts about this. The quote below is what he has to say about the omissions. The question I have: Is it OK to include part of a person's testimony that backs his statement but omits that which does not? It will be interesting to hear how the judge views it.

"An affidavit must include all material facts even if they cast doubt on the existence of probable cause. Omissions will invalidate a warrant if 1) the police omitted the facts to make the affidavit misleading or w/ reckless disregard; and 2) if supplemented w/ this info there would not be PC. Will discuss further in the next post."
I might be the only one who thinks the bullet may possibly have just been planted there
He never lent the gun, so his wife or a burglar got a bullet?
I think more likely he lost a bullet in all.the exertion of killing and trying to cover up the crime.
 
* No line up that I'm aware of.
* We don't know how many guns he had. I don't know how they settle on the number of items to take. Can that bullet only be shot from the type of gun he took? (see below)
* They took a bunch of phones
* I think the ones listed are the only ones they took. (Plus the one from the scene.)

I looked up my own question:
Other 40 Cal. Pistol Options:
  • Beretta 96A1.
  • Walther PPQ M2.
  • Springfield XD .40.
  • Beretta Px4 Storm.
  • SIG P226/P229.
  • Walther P99.
I identified the gun in his pocket a while back. If I did the investigators did. So they knew the gun they were looking for.
  1. Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #114

    MOO I think a deep grip handgun was used - I see an imprint of that type of hand gun in his right jacket pocket. Something very similar to the Sig Sauer Elite match. With a long thinning barrel structure and deep grip. It would be simple to control people with a cannon like that at close range.
 
I don't know.

This is all I can find on the topic.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/19/162.15#:~:text=prev%20%7C%20next-,§%20162.15%20Receipt%20for%20seized%20property.,place%20on%20the%20premises%20searched.
§ 162.15 Receipt for seized property.
A receipt for property seized under a search warrant shall be left with the person in charge or possession of the premises, or in the absence of any person, the receipt shall be left in some conspicuous place on the premises searched.
 
Do you know, does LE bring along a laptop and record all these specifics on site during the execution of a SW or is the form handwritten/scrawled and later transcribed in neat type?

That is a good question. Way back in 1996 when JonBenet was murdered, all of the search warrant items removed from the home were documented by the Detective's handwritten notes.

In the SS of the items taken from RA's home by Sgt Matt Clemens, are the lab results, from the lab exam conducted on the gun and the sgl bullet from the dresser, documented on the far left column but redacted from our view?

Why Rick would keep a special single bullet inside a wooden keepsake box on the dresser in the master bedroom? At home, all of my excess ammo is stored in their respective original ammo box is why I ask.


witness-jpg.450352
 
Which of the witnesses mentioned in the docs is the one mentioned here - Fox59?

Police say the person depicted in the composite sketch is described as a white male between 5’6” to 5’10”, weighing 180 to 220 pounds, with reddish brown hair. The eye color is unknown, but according to one witness, his eyes are not blue.
 
Please provide documentation stating that LE has lied.

Defense memo page 43 and 44:

At his August 8, 2023, deposition, Sheriff Liggett was adamant that one person, and one
person alone – Richard Allen – was involved in the murder of Abby and Libby.34 However, off
record Liggett doesn’t believe that one man was capable of pulling off all of those tasks, especially
in such a short period of time, leaving behind a crime scene with no forensic evidence. As referred
to earlier, Liggett says one thing publicly under oath, but a different thing off-record to his buddies.
One of those buddies is former Sheriff (and now Chief Deputy Sheriff) Tobe Leazenby. The day
after Liggett’s August 8, 2023, deposition, Tobe Leazenby was subject to a deposition.
When Tobe Leazenby was asked at his deposition how many people he believed were
involved in the murder of Abby and Libby, Leazenby provided a different answer than Liggett. He
(Leazenby) indicated that “at least two” people were involved.35 The reasons Leazenby gave as to
his belief that “at least two” people were involved in the murders was Leazenby’s belief that “it
would be difficult for one individual to accomplish what occurred.”36
33 Again, Jerry Holeman testified in his deposition that investigators estimated the time of death as occurring
somewhere between 2:30 and 3:30 p.m. (Holeman depo., p. 17, lines 6-21).
34 Liggett depo. P. 67, lines 13-19
35 Leazenby depo. p. 19, lines 19-20.
36 Leazenby depo. p. 20, lines 9-10.
44
When asked if any other law enforcement officers shared this perspective, Leazenby
provided a surprising answer based upon what Liggett had testified to under oath the day before:
Yes, at least one other law enforcement officer believed multiple people were involved in the
murder of Abby and Libby: Tony Liggett. According to Leazenby’s sworn statement, it was
common for he (Leazenby) and Tony Liggett to have one-on-one conversations, and that Tony
Liggett definitely believed that more than one person was involved.37
Tony Liggett, who just the day before under oath claimed that only one person – Richard
Allen – was involved in the murders, privately behind the scenes, was saying something altogether
different in one-on-one conversations with his law enforcement friends.
 
That he allegedly confessed five times(?) before she hung up leads me to think it was quite an intense conversation. She could’ve hung up after the first time.

I read that about the “her person”. I‘d wondered if the reporter misheard?
I think you might be right. I've never been able to reconcile that statement by her---'he's my person'---with the surrounding circumstances of the hearing.

Maybe she said 'He was my person' ---as in past tense, and lamenting the sad situation that she was once so sure she had found her person and it imploded so horribly and publicly.
“ACCUSED Delphi murderer Richard Allen offered his wife no acknowledgment as he appeared in court after reportedly making a series of confessions about the 2017 killings, two podcasters say.

Allen's wife, Kathy Allen, reportedly burst into tears at the sight of him as he was led into the courtroom….”
The above details don't make it seem like she is convinced he is her person, at this time.
 
All this Odinist stuff is clearly garbage.

Odinists tend to be Volkisch - an Odinist wouldn't sacrifice two young girls of the (white) folk who could have plenty of healthy bouncing Aryan children.

Besides which, there's no religious reason to sacrifice another person. It's not a sacrifice unless *you* give something up - it's merely an offering to your god(s). Historically the Vikings (who Odinists emulate) would slaughter livestock in their rituals. The animal blood would be used to consecrate the space and the meat would be eaten by the celebrants.

It's either a meth riddled fantasy, desperate play, or mental illness. It's like saying Jonestown was a Christian massacre. Jonestown clearly had nothing to do with Christianity, and in the same way, this doesn't have anything to do with Odinism. I'd bet my last dollar.

Rant over, I'll return to my usual easy going self shortly.
Here’s something to think about- it’s possible that in 2024 the cases of RA and Brian Kohberger plus a few other controversial high profile cases will go to trial plus toss in the battle for the White House. We may need an in-house therapist to treat the stress and a physician to treat high blood pressure.
 
Here’s something to think about- it’s possible that in 2024 the cases of RA and Brian Kohberger plus a few other controversial high profile cases will go to trial plus toss in the battle for the White House. We may need an in-house therapist to treat the stress and a physician to treat high blood pressure.
And a rolling bar cart for our preferred beverages of choice. Whew, it could get wild around here.
 
Here’s something to think about- it’s possible that in 2024 the cases of RA and Brian Kohberger plus a few other controversial high profile cases will go to trial plus toss in the battle for the White House. We may need an in-house therapist to treat the stress and a physician to treat high blood pressure.
Summer Olympics also in 2024
 
So, late to the party, just read RA's D 136 page memo. Wow.

Setting aside two things for a moment -
1. The hyperbole and curiously non legal language used at points throughout the memo which are quite jarring and odd to my eyes, certainly not the way I'd expense my legal counsel to word things.

2.The whole notion of an Odinist cult conspiracy/ ritual killing per se.

The things that jump out to me on first read include -

a. Allegations of exculpatory and other evidence being hidden, concealed and not provided until confronted with it

b. A number of allegations of lies and acting in bad faith on the behalf of the Unified Command investigative team and Prosecutor

c. That 3 investigators outside of Unified Command continued their own investigation separately

d. The existence of a number of suspects which were eliminated very early on in the investigation (but which the D contests should have been pursued more vigorously)

e. Detailed presentation of the crime scene, the 'tasks' required to commit the crime and stage the scene, and an opinion related to the time required and capability of a lone man (in particular a small build one) to be able to do these alone/ without assistance

f. Based on e. its increasingly hard to understand how DNA has not been recovered from the crime scene and/ or victims? (That we know of to date)

g. Jerry Holeman ISP ' there is no DNA etc linking RA to the crime scene (But what DNA has actually been recovered?)

h. Allegations relating to the prosecutions timeline involving RA which attempt to discredit elements that underpin it

i. In particular examination of the use (mis-use?) of witness statements and in particular some alleged selectivity in which bits are used and which are disregarded in relation to the prosecution timeline

Overall without commenting on the overall veracity of the memo, it does make for an interesting and illuminating read with more detail being surfaced.

Need to read it again to start to make my own mind up about the many allegations made. On first read I'm not impressed with the Odinist cult stuff, but the presentation of the other suspects and the prosecution evidence and timeline is worth another look.

Of course what we don't know whilst reading this is what other evidence that the prosecution have up their sleeve... (or not as the case may be).
 
I think you might be right. I've never been able to reconcile that statement by her---'he's my person'---with the surrounding circumstances of the hearing.

Maybe she said 'He was my person' ---as in past tense, and lamenting the sad situation that she was once so sure she had found her person and it imploded so horribly and publicly.

The above details don't make it seem like she is convinced he is her person, at this time.

Yes good possibility, as wife must’ve been speaking to reporter at the same time as she burst into tears, it’s highly possibly she referred to him in past tense, “was” her person. That would make much more sense considering the circumstances and the fact that he didn’t even acknowledge her. JMO
 
Defense memo page 43 and 44:

At his August 8, 2023, deposition, Sheriff Liggett was adamant that one person, and one
person alone – Richard Allen – was involved in the murder of Abby and Libby.34 However, off
record Liggett doesn’t believe that one man was capable of pulling off all of those tasks, especially
in such a short period of time, leaving behind a crime scene with no forensic evidence. As referred
to earlier, Liggett says one thing publicly under oath, but a different thing off-record to his buddies.
One of those buddies is former Sheriff (and now Chief Deputy Sheriff) Tobe Leazenby. The day
after Liggett’s August 8, 2023, deposition, Tobe Leazenby was subject to a deposition.
When Tobe Leazenby was asked at his deposition how many people he believed were
involved in the murder of Abby and Libby, Leazenby provided a different answer than Liggett. He
(Leazenby) indicated that “at least two” people were involved.35 The reasons Leazenby gave as to
his belief that “at least two” people were involved in the murders was Leazenby’s belief that “it
would be difficult for one individual to accomplish what occurred.”36
33 Again, Jerry Holeman testified in his deposition that investigators estimated the time of death as occurring
somewhere between 2:30 and 3:30 p.m. (Holeman depo., p. 17, lines 6-21).
34 Liggett depo. P. 67, lines 13-19
35 Leazenby depo. p. 19, lines 19-20.
36 Leazenby depo. p. 20, lines 9-10.
44
When asked if any other law enforcement officers shared this perspective, Leazenby
provided a surprising answer based upon what Liggett had testified to under oath the day before:
Yes, at least one other law enforcement officer believed multiple people were involved in the
murder of Abby and Libby: Tony Liggett. According to Leazenby’s sworn statement, it was
common for he (Leazenby) and Tony Liggett to have one-on-one conversations, and that Tony
Liggett definitely believed that more than one person was involved.37
Tony Liggett, who just the day before under oath claimed that only one person – Richard
Allen – was involved in the murders, privately behind the scenes, was saying something altogether
different in one-on-one conversations with his law enforcement friends.

Huh? Pretty flimsy example of lying IMO.

Look at how many times the word “believe” has been written - belief is just an opinion with no evidence to back it up, as opposed to ‘knowing’. Rendering an opinion in a sworn statement does not prove the opinion to be factual.

Wow, I’m shocked at the ridiculously devious and manipulative tactics used by this defence. They must think the Judge is really stupid, if she’d fall for that garbage. It makes a mockery of the intent behind the purpose of a Frank’s Hearing.

Seems to me at one time LE believed a second person might’ve been involved, but no evidence was found connecting to other persons, so then the conclusion was reached that RA must’ve acted alone. That’s not lying, that’s an example of an investigation progressing.

My opinion.
 
Last edited:
Yes good possibility, as wife must’ve been speaking to reporter at the same time as she burst into tears, it’s highly possibly she referred to him in past tense, “was” her person. That would make much more sense considering the circumstances and the fact that he didn’t even acknowledge her. JMO
I got lots of Google hits on "He's my person" and it appears to be a very positive thing. Maybe she broke into tears at seeing what condition he was in.

I think they both know that, even if he's found innocent or the case is dismissed, their life as they knew it is over. Their home is gone, their life is gone... maybe he told her to just get on with hers. Since he asked repeatedly if his wife was ok, maybe there really was some threat against her. Maybe she hung up on him because she knew their conversations were recorded.

It seemed from what we know that they were a happy couple.
 
Defense memo page 43 and 44:

At his August 8, 2023, deposition, Sheriff Liggett was adamant that one person, and one
person alone – Richard Allen – was involved in the murder of Abby and Libby.34 However, off
record Liggett doesn’t believe that one man was capable of pulling off all of those tasks, especially
in such a short period of time, leaving behind a crime scene with no forensic evidence. As referred
to earlier, Liggett says one thing publicly under oath, but a different thing off-record to his buddies.
One of those buddies is former Sheriff (and now Chief Deputy Sheriff) Tobe Leazenby. The day
after Liggett’s August 8, 2023, deposition, Tobe Leazenby was subject to a deposition.
When Tobe Leazenby was asked at his deposition how many people he believed were
involved in the murder of Abby and Libby, Leazenby provided a different answer than Liggett. He
(Leazenby) indicated that “at least two” people were involved.35 The reasons Leazenby gave as to
his belief that “at least two” people were involved in the murders was Leazenby’s belief that “it
would be difficult for one individual to accomplish what occurred.”36
33 Again, Jerry Holeman testified in his deposition that investigators estimated the time of death as occurring
somewhere between 2:30 and 3:30 p.m. (Holeman depo., p. 17, lines 6-21).
34 Liggett depo. P. 67, lines 13-19
35 Leazenby depo. p. 19, lines 19-20.
36 Leazenby depo. p. 20, lines 9-10.
44
When asked if any other law enforcement officers shared this perspective, Leazenby
provided a surprising answer based upon what Liggett had testified to under oath the day before:
Yes, at least one other law enforcement officer believed multiple people were involved in the
murder of Abby and Libby: Tony Liggett. According to Leazenby’s sworn statement, it was
common for he (Leazenby) and Tony Liggett to have one-on-one conversations, and that Tony
Liggett definitely believed that more than one person was involved.37
Tony Liggett, who just the day before under oath claimed that only one person – Richard
Allen – was involved in the murders, privately behind the scenes, was saying something altogether
different in one-on-one conversations with his law enforcement friends.

These appear to be opinion and not lies.
If I weigh this against the defenses memo, it pales.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
798
Total visitors
919

Forum statistics

Threads
587,704
Messages
17,888,137
Members
227,214
Latest member
Momma T
Back
Top