IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #172

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey! That's me!
sbm

Yes. I heard Vinny announce your appearance as a connection to MS. I know you announced earlier to the thread that you were on CourtTV last night. However, you did not post the link. So, if you do not want that link posted for any reason please let me know and I will be happy to edit. TIA
 
Hey! That's me!




The crux of the Frank affidavit is "RA didn't do it, these racist evil Odinites did!"

Why does Odinism have ties to racism? That is a long long long answer but the very high level is due to 18th-20th century European nationalism movements using Norse/Germanic myths and trappings to inspire unity. This was eventually shaped into a religion by a man named Guido von List around 1905. His group "The List Society" was the largest influence for occultism on the Nazi party.

Else Christensen was a Nazi. I have copies of her writings where she debates David Duke on what the proper religion of the "white race." She, like most hard core racist Odinists, chose their religion to match their hate.

If you want a deep dive I suggest the book Gods of the Blood or I will shamelessly plug my own work - Heathen History Podcast
In his 10/10/2023 affidavit, the warden, John Galipeau says:

“5. That Correctional Officers at Westville Correctional Facility were allowed to wear any patches on their vests until the allegations made by the Defense in their motion.

6. That Westville Correctional Facility offers religious services if there are at least 5 individuals that practice the religion in the complex and to date we have not had more than 5 individuals in the complex request to hold services related to Odinism.

13. That I do not have an agenda or a vested interest in keeping the Defendant incarcerated in a facility that is ripe with connections to Odinism.

14. That Westville Correctional facility has very few inmates that practice Odinism.”

IMG_3608.jpeg

In his 10/10/203 affidavit, Sgt Jones says:

“4. That I do not practice Odinism and that Norse Paganism Heathenry is my practicing religion.

5. That I do wear patches on my uniform that identify me as someone who practices
Norse Paganism Heathenry.

6 That I started wearing the patches 6 or 7 months ago and I did not stop wearing my patches until September 22, 2023, when ordered by my command to remove the patches.”

Do you think the confusion might be due to conflation of Norse Pagan Heathenry and Odinism? Is it possible that while practitioners would likely know the difference, those who aren’t practitioners might see them as the same thing (like the warden, the defense)?

(I don’t associate any religion with criminal activity. I believe criminals are within all religions/groups and exploit whatever is convenient for them at the time. JMO.)

I have heard that the group o9A (Order of the Nine Angles) sometimes use Nordic runes in their rituals-do you know if this is true? I found this interesting bc my Norse friend said Odinism is a corruption of real Norse paganism and “more like Hollywood Satanism” and above you said “Odinists are not unlike the Satanic Temple - they use the color of religion to achieve their own ends.” Since o9A has connections to the neo-Nazi groups Atomwaffen Division, The Base, Combat 18, National Action, and the Nordic Resistant Movement, is it possible, if there were Nordic runes at the CS, and if there was a group involved, that the perps could have had connections to a group like o9a instead of Norse Paganism/Odinism? I understand the how observation of a potential F rune on the tree/a potential Nordic rune at the CS might lead to Norse paganism, but I still don’t understand where the white supremacist angle came from in the media…unless they are just associating Norse paganism with white supremacy? TIA!

AJMO

EDIT: typo

Sources:
John Galipeau (warden) Affidavit 10/10/2023
Scanned Document | PDF Host
CO Jones Affidavit 10/10/2023
Scanned Document | PDF Host
Order of the Nine Angles (Wikipedia)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3607.jpeg
    IMG_3607.jpeg
    140.7 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Not sure why legal conclusions are being made here that B&R gave up any rights they had by not objecting on the record. The court has not yet ruled. In a broad and very basic sense this is required and is a true statement by AG, but it's basic. Facts always matter in the law. I'm interested to see if CW asks for leave to file a reply even though it may be denied. There was a record rolling in-chambers and the court has that transcript. It is seems erroneous to take the argument of one side and post it as a legal fact and conclusion. This is what the court will do after it examines all evidence from both sides. I think we have to wait to see what weight and value the supreme court will attribute to the events that unfolded in chambers.

Thank you for this (and many other posts). While I believe it is all well-intentioned, some of the statements in here by non-lawyers have been so befuddling to me that, after many years of posting and 30+ years as a lawyer, I finally decided to get my shiny new "Verified Attorney" status so that I could help correct many of the misinterpretations that have been posted. So I waltzed in today ready to gently correct a lot of statements about what constitutes "gross negligence" but instead saw the informative posts by @Seph and didn't want to distract from those by going down that rabbithole with the thread.

Instead I'll just say that the standard for "gross negligence" is incredibly high, much more so than has been understood by many posters. This is not a judgment on whether the former defense counsel reached that standard, as I couldn't possibly say, but the chasm between "simple negligence" and "gross negligence" as a legal matter is vast, to the point where a finding of gross negligence is extremely difficult to reach in any context.

Back to posts a lot more interesting than mine. :)
 
Last edited:
Thank you for this (and many other posts). While I believe it is all well-intentioned, some of the statements in here by non-lawyers have been so befuddling to me that, after many years of posting and 30+ years as a lawyer, I finally decided to get my shiny new "Verified Attorney" status so that I could help correct many of the misinterpretations that have been posted. So I waltzed in today ready to gently correct a lot of statements about what constitutes "gross negligence" but instead saw the excellent and informative posts by @Seph and didn't want to distract from those by going down that rabbithole with the thread.

Instead I'll just say that the standard for "gross negligence" is incredibly high, much more so than has been understood by many posters. This is not a judgment on whether the former defense counsel reached that standard, as I couldn't possibly say, but the chasm between "simple negligence" and "gross negligence" as a legal matter is vast, to the point where a finding of gross negligence is extremely difficult to reach in any context.

Back to posts a lot more interesting than mine. :)
I’m sure this has been asked before, but if an attorney was found to be grossly negligent, they would still have a hearing where they would be able to present their side of the argument and where the facts of “gross negligence” would be presented on the record? Has there ever been a DQ of defense attorneys by a judge without a hearing? This part blows my mind-but IANAL so it is possible I am missing something. Thank you!
 
I’m sure this has been asked before, but if an attorney was found to be grossly negligent, they would still have a hearing where they would be able to present their side of the argument and where the facts of “gross negligence” would be presented on the record? Has there ever been a DQ of defense attorneys by a judge without a hearing? This part blows my mind-but IANAL so it is possible I am missing something. Thank you!

It's hard to say whether a DQ has ever happened without a hearing, but in my opinion even if not unheard of, it would be highly unusual and uncommon. Even having a DQ of a defense attorney at all is pretty rare and in my experience would often arise from a conflict issue rather than something like this. And despite some posts that seemed to equate "gross negligence" with a "conflict," those are two separate matters entirely. I believe gross negligence allegations are relatively rare because it's such a high standard. Shoot, there are cases where an attorney literally slept during a trial and it was not found to be ineffective assistance of counsel!

Like several others here, based on what I've seen, I'm troubled by the way this was handled. Not that I believe there was some conspiracy or even that the judge "favors" the prosecution, but it seems very sloppy, lacking in expected procedure, and, as many have pointed out, is creating issues that serve as at best a distraction and at worst an unnecessary avenue of appeal, delaying justice for everyone involved, whether or not RA is guilty.
 
Last edited:
It's hard to say whether a DQ has ever happened without a hearing, but in my opinion even if not unheard of, it would be highly unusual and uncommon. Even having a DQ of a defense attorney at all is pretty rare and in my experience would more often arise from a conflict issue than something like this. And despite some posts that seemed to equate "gross negligence" with a "conflict," those are two separate matters entirely. I believe gross negligence allegations are relatively rare because it's such a high standard. Shoot, there are cases where an attorney literally slept during a trial and it was not found to be ineffective assistance of counsel!

Like several others here, based on what I've seen, I'm troubled by the way this was handled. Not that I believe there was some conspiracy or even that the judge "favors" the prosecution, but it seems very sloppy, lacking in expected procedure, and, as many have pointed out, is creating issues that serve as at best a distraction and at worst an unnecessary avenue of appeal, delaying justice for everyone involved, whether or not RA is guilty.
Is it normal for a defendant to be thrown in a prison before a trial? If there were cases that happened, what were the circumstances?

Do you know how common or uncommon it typically is for defense attorneys to request their client moved from one place to another? Is it common for a judge to deny these requests?

I find it alarming that 1. a defendant without a trial is in prison-whether he’s guilty or not. 2. That the judge concealed a record of a letter from another inmate that RA was being abused and 3. That the transfer request was also denied.

If I was a judge I would think I would want to transfer him simply bc it wouldn’t make sense not to, and even if I had bias, I wouldn’t think it would look very good to the public to deny the request. The entire thing doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. JMO.
 
I think KK set up the meeting-by his own admission, RA abducted them, and RL provided his property/barn. Remember way back when police were looking for a backpack? I believe that probably held some of the change of clothes for RA, or weapons. I think it was stashed in RL's barn. Sounds like a group of pediphiles to me. Would not doubt that there were pictures taken.
 
Is it normal for a defendant to be thrown in a prison before a trial? If there were cases that happened, what were the circumstances?

Do you know how common or uncommon it typically is for defense attorneys to request their client moved from one place to another? Is it common for a judge to deny these requests?

I find it alarming that 1. a defendant without a trial is in prison-whether he’s guilty or not. 2. That the judge concealed a record of a letter from another inmate that RA was being abused and 3. That the transfer request was also denied.

If I was a judge I would think I would want to transfer him simply bc it wouldn’t make sense not to, and even if I had bias, I wouldn’t think it would look very good to the public to deny the request. The entire thing doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. JMO.

Some answers to your first question, all Indiana cases.

HAMILTON COUNTY, Ind. — The man awaiting trial for the shooting death of an Elwood Police department officer will spend the time before trial in state custody.
On Friday, a judge approved the state’s request to hold Carl Roy Webb Boards II at the Pendleton Correctional Facility until his trial.


Also, a judge granted a motion to move Mitchell to the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction. Reasons for the request by the sheriff's office were Mitchell likely being charged in Durm's death and Mitchell posing a risk of serious bodily injury or death to others.


ALBION — An Auburn man charged in the 1975 murder of a North Webster 17-year-old was being returned to the Noble County Jail Thursday afternoon.
Just how long John W. Lehman, 67, stays in Albion isn’t certain.
On July 14, Noble County Sheriff Max Weber asked that Lehman be ordered into the custody of the Indiana Department of Corrections. Weber’s letter cited medical and safety concerns.

 
I’m sure this has been asked before, but if an attorney was found to be grossly negligent, they would still have a hearing where they would be able to present their side of the argument and where the facts of “gross negligence” would be presented on the record? Has there ever been a DQ of defense attorneys by a judge without a hearing? This part blows my mind-but IANAL so it is possible I am missing something. Thank you!

Let's see what, if anything, the court says about the negligence issue, because remember from CW and Leeman's brief, it's not a ground. The court may never reach the merits, and if they don't, the issue should survive for appeal.

Relator's Brief pp 14-15

"The attorney-client relationship, once established, is inviolate, and should not be severed or subject to “unwarranted interference.” Latta v. State, 743 N.E.2d 1121 (Ind. 2001). The attorney-client relationship is afforded the same venerable protections whether the lawyer is a public defender, acting pro bono, or privately retained. Smith, 440 P.2d at 74; Lane v. State, 80 So. 3d 280, 297 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010).

Indiana recognizes only two narrowly circumscribed situations where a trial court may sever the attorney-client relationship against the client’s wishes: (1) the lawyer is not a member of the state bar, Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 159 (1988); or (2) the lawyer has an actual conflict of interest that will obstruct his ability to provide effective representation. See T.C.H., 714 N.E.2d 1162 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).

No Indiana court has ever tolerated a trial judge removing a lawyer from a case, over the client’s objection, based on the judge’s subjective belief the lawyer is negligent, or even “grossly negligent.” And courts across the country regularly issue extraordinary writs in criminal cases to reinstate defense attorneys who have been kicked off cases for conduct the trial court found upsetting or negligent"


jmo
 
Some answers to your first question, all Indiana cases.

HAMILTON COUNTY, Ind. — The man awaiting trial for the shooting death of an Elwood Police department officer will spend the time before trial in state custody.
On Friday, a judge approved the state’s request to hold Carl Roy Webb Boards II at the Pendleton Correctional Facility until his trial.


Also, a judge granted a motion to move Mitchell to the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction. Reasons for the request by the sheriff's office were Mitchell likely being charged in Durm's death and Mitchell posing a risk of serious bodily injury or death to others.


ALBION — An Auburn man charged in the 1975 murder of a North Webster 17-year-old was being returned to the Noble County Jail Thursday afternoon.
Just how long John W. Lehman, 67, stays in Albion isn’t certain.
On July 14, Noble County Sheriff Max Weber asked that Lehman be ordered into the custody of the Indiana Department of Corrections. Weber’s letter cited medical and safety concerns.


Without reading the details of each of these it seems like (an unfortunate) pattern. But, a pattern (and way of practice) nonetheless. Thanks for pulling these.
 
Some answers to your first question, all Indiana cases.

HAMILTON COUNTY, Ind. — The man awaiting trial for the shooting death of an Elwood Police department officer will spend the time before trial in state custody.
On Friday, a judge approved the state’s request to hold Carl Roy Webb Boards II at the Pendleton Correctional Facility until his trial.


Also, a judge granted a motion to move Mitchell to the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction. Reasons for the request by the sheriff's office were Mitchell likely being charged in Durm's death and Mitchell posing a risk of serious bodily injury or death to others.


ALBION — An Auburn man charged in the 1975 murder of a North Webster 17-year-old was being returned to the Noble County Jail Thursday afternoon.
Just how long John W. Lehman, 67, stays in Albion isn’t certain.
On July 14, Noble County Sheriff Max Weber asked that Lehman be ordered into the custody of the Indiana Department of Corrections. Weber’s letter cited medical and safety concerns.

Thank you for finding these. It looks like the first 2 were arrested for murdering an LE officer. The other, Lehman, is more confusing-it looks like DNA evidence may imply he is the wrong man? And the prison is refusing to take him but the sheriff wants him placed in prison instead of jail?
 
I think KK set up the meeting-by his own admission, RA abducted them, and RL provided his property/barn. Remember way back when police were looking for a backpack? I believe that probably held some of the change of clothes for RA, or weapons. I think it was stashed in RL's barn. Sounds like a group of pediphiles to me. Would not doubt that there were pictures taken.
RL SW:
Search warrant: Delphi killer took souvenir, may have ‘staged’ murder scene
PDF
https://interactive.wthr.com/pdfs/logan-warrrant.pdf
 
Thank you for finding these. It looks like the first 2 were arrested for murdering an LE officer. The other, Lehman, is more confusing-it looks like DNA evidence may imply he is the wrong man? And the prison is refusing to take him but the sheriff wants him placed in prison instead of jail?
Yes, you are correct. I don't know what other evidence the state has on Lehman besides what has been released. Laurel Mitchell has a thread here with links to more information. Lehman is in a state facility (Miami) now as his court docket states he is participatong in his hearings via Zoom.
 
What, if LE found the tripod for a camera, which had left prints at the crime scene?
I was thinking, what if pictures, not produced by LE, have been found on the bowels of the web of the crime scene? Can they be digitally traced to a known associate of the defendant or a dropbox? That could be a tricky situation, establishing a link. Just some thoughts.
 
Thank you for this (and many other posts). While I believe it is all well-intentioned, some of the statements in here by non-lawyers have been so befuddling to me that, after many years of posting and 30+ years as a lawyer, I finally decided to get my shiny new "Verified Attorney" status so that I could help correct many of the misinterpretations that have been posted. So I waltzed in today ready to gently correct a lot of statements about what constitutes "gross negligence" but instead saw the informative posts by @Seph and didn't want to distract from those by going down that rabbithole with the thread.

Instead I'll just say that the standard for "gross negligence" is incredibly high, much more so than has been understood by many posters. This is not a judgment on whether the former defense counsel reached that standard, as I couldn't possibly say, but the chasm between "simple negligence" and "gross negligence" as a legal matter is vast, to the point where a finding of gross negligence is extremely difficult to reach in any context.

Back to posts a lot more interesting than mine. :)

Nice to meet you @kae27!

It's interesting Judge Gull pivoted to talking about 'incompetence' in her response - apparently conceding that 'gross negligence' was not the right standard?
 
I’m sure this has been asked before, but if an attorney was found to be grossly negligent, they would still have a hearing where they would be able to present their side of the argument and where the facts of “gross negligence” would be presented on the record? Has there ever been a DQ of defense attorneys by a judge without a hearing? This part blows my mind-but IANAL so it is possible I am missing something. Thank you!
AB and BR withdrew then BR later claimed he lied to the judge when he said that in chambers.

That's just unacceptable and shows a lack of proper consideration...gross negligence yet again. AJMO
 
The AG's response contains one interesting angle on things (p15) which is a bit different to what has been discussed on here. Neither Gull nor the AG push the idea that Baldwin & Rozzi actually withdrew, however (my emphasis) ...

C. The lack of record prevents review of counsel’s disqualification.
Defense counsels’ withdrawal truncated the proceedings, and the present
record prohibits complete review of whether the trial court’s concerns justified
substitution of counsel. In chambers prior to the October 19 hearing, the court listed
reasons it felt counsel should be disqualified that it intended to address in the
hearing (SR 13-17). The prosecutor was prepared to present evidence from the leak
investigation (SR 8-9, 13-17). But this hearing did not occur because defense counsel
withdrew rather than challenge the factual allegations at that time
(SR 21-23). At
the October 31 hearing where Baldwin and Rozzi attempted to appear for Allen and
had their own counsel, no additional evidence was offered or arguments made to
rebut the court’s allegations (R2 29).

As I understand it**, the AG argues that the record is too incomplete to determine whether there were sufficient grounds for Judge Gull to remove the attorney and that question should in any event be handled in a full appeal.

But the interesting bit is that AG says the deficiency is at least in part caused by the counsels' withdrawal and then take back

While I favour Rozzi and Baldwins arguments about lack of a hearing, I do think this is an important point being made by the AG. In other words AG says counsel can't promise a judge they will do something and in reliance she doesn't hold the hearing, then they don't do the thing.

Be very interested to see how much weight SCOIN gives to that.

Anyway - I have some sympathy for the AGs view that they needed to do the hearing, lose it, then appeal it and that you can't play the judge, even if she is acting out of hand.

** my own weak interpretation only. YMMV

 
I like your opinion here. If you allow me to reword the above for my understanding? If R & B are reinstated it could lead to a hearing where the Judge disqualifies R & B at said hearing?

That would work for me. Full disclosure. In my opinion it would be great to have this trial about Libby and Abby once again. Separate a trail focused on justice for Libby and Abby and their horrific end of life from the conduct of two attorneys.
It’s very sad this trial has turned into a 3 ring circus involving the highly unethical and unprofessional defense team and some of the true crime entertainment industry. JMO
 
Can anyone advise on which of the legal commentators out there are approved for this thread?

I understand Murder Sheet is, but there are a number of other attorneys like Bob Motta regularly talking about the case. I get that if they appear on MSM then they can be quoted. I can't find a list on page 1 of the thread beyond MS and GH

TIA!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
1,200
Total visitors
1,415

Forum statistics

Threads
587,739
Messages
17,888,751
Members
227,220
Latest member
Lizl C
Back
Top