LIBBY GERMAN & ABBY WILLIAMS: Indiana vs. Richard Allen for 2017 murder of two Delphi girls *GUILTY*

On February 14, 2017, the bodies of Abigail Williams and Liberty German were discovered near the Monon High Bridge Trail, which is part of the Delphi Historic Trails in Delphi, Indiana, United States, after the young girls had disappeared from the same trail the previous day. The murders have received significant media coverage because a photo and audio recording of an individual believed to be the girls' murderer was found on German's smartphone. Despite the audio and video recordings of the suspect that have been circulated and the more than 26,000 tips that police have received, no arrest in the case has been made.[1][2][3]

1581272168478.png

Police have not publicly stated nor released details of how the girls were murdered.[6] As early as February 15, 2017, Indiana State Police began circulating a still image of an individual reportedly seen on the Monon High Bridge Trail near where the two friends were slain; the grainy photograph appearing to capture a Caucasian male, with hands in pockets, walking on the rail bridge, head down, toward the girls.[4] A few days later, the person in the photograph was named the prime suspect in the double-homicide.[5]

On February 22, law enforcement released an audio recording where the voice of the assailant,[7] though in some degree muffled, is heard to say, "Down the hill." It was at this news conference that officials credited the source of the audio and imagery to German's smartphone, and, further, regarded her as a hero for having had the uncanny foresight and fortitude to record the exchange in secret. Police indicated that additional evidence from the phone had been secured, but that they did not release it so as not to "compromise any future trial." By this time, the reward offered in the case was set at $41,000.[5]


1581272119747.png


 
Last edited by a moderator:
JMHO:
The Court has a personality disorder. (i.e the Judge)
This mess happened b/c Gull didn't confront the Defense back in September, didn't insist they resubmit the Memo to the standard she expects; doesn't Control her Court; hides records rather than following records rules; she has all the power she needs to manage the attorneys in her Court but she chooses not to b/c she's a coward that would rather hold a grudge than confront a problem ... and asks the P if she should DQ his courtroom adversary. (C'mon!)
And that makes her passive-aggressive.
Consequently, Gull runs a lazy toxic court.
And it ends up in judicial overreach.
Go ahead. Change my mind.

I skipped over the past four pages so forgive me if this has been mentioned before. @Olenna are you talking about the Judge asking the Prosecution if they were happy with the new defense attorneys? That came up on Vinnie's show the other night.

Olenna, why don't you like MS they seem really great to me.
 
I skipped over the past four pages so forgive me if this has been mentioned before. @Olenna are you talking about the Judge asking the Prosecution if they were happy with the new defense attorneys? That came up on Vinnie's show the other night.

Olenna, why don't you like MS they seem really great to me.
I've kept listening to MS b/c they are the only ones in the courtroom and ... that is a very valuable service to their podcast listeners. ... and so good for them on that.

MS has only recently softened their pro-defense attitude.
My impression is that they are learning courtroom dynamics as they go.
My impression is that their "sources" are related to local LE or ISP.
They need to develop sources that are not related to LE.
They need to sharpen their courtroom knowledge - they need a litigation expert as a source; they are missing courtroom dynamics.
They accept that Gull consults with the prosecutor as to what the Prosecutor thinks about disqualifying the Defense that the Prosecutor hates with the intensity of a thousand suns. lol.
It took them far too long to see that Gull failed to give the old Defense the opportunity to be heard.

IF they continue to hold Gull and Prosecution to the same high bar they hold for the Defense ... I'll continue listening. JHMO

I CAN recommend this podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@ProsecutorsPodcast
See: "Live" as well as the other sections.
MS is very friendly with "The Prosecutors"; and this podcast just won the people's choice award at whatever society does crime-podcasting awards.
 
Last edited:
Well I am going down for the count soon but will try to but i the meantime I will say I am not the fan of Vinnie and the Think Tank that the guy who thinks he owns the folding chair is. Same with News Nation and Law and Crime, etc. I feel I watch better and read better than those that run these... That isn't to says I never watch a new one or someone not as stellar just as you watched MS etc.

Court TV and Vinnie is well what it is. I bring it for those that think YT or podcasters are a joke but would watch Court TV which by the way when I bring it I get it from YT. I know a fair handful will watch that and not other things.

Court TV and Vinnie are trying hard to compete, stay in the race and not become irrelevant. I have to give 'em that and it works for types that haven't realized thee is better out there.

Remind me which one to watch of yours if you can some time tomorrow. Been a long haul of a day for me.
 
I skipped over the past four pages so forgive me if this has been mentioned before. @Olenna are you talking about the Judge asking the Prosecution if they were happy with the new defense attorneys? That came up on Vinnie's show the other night.

Olenna, why don't you like MS they seem really great to me.

I'm taking about THIS below ... BUT ... I'd love to see the Vinnie conversation you describe above if you can find it.

What did Vinnie say about the Judge asking the Prosecution if the Prosecution thought RA's chosen attorneys should be let back on the case as pro-bono - consulting the P and the P alone as to her decision to can RA's chosen attorneys?

 
I skipped over the past four pages so forgive me if this has been mentioned before. @Olenna are you talking about the Judge asking the Prosecution if they were happy with the new defense attorneys? That came up on Vinnie's show the other night.

Olenna, why don't you like MS they seem really great to me.
I can go either way on MS. Only he is an attorney for one. And honestly call it shallow but I'd like to tell him to at least be neatly trimmed and do something with his hair. People talk of man buns and Vallow's lipstick and court appearances but what about him... He is an attorney and they do attend... Call me what you will but it is a bit harder to trust someone who doesn't even try to take care somewhat of his own appearance. Looks more like a mad professor. Unfair I know but I am sure I am not alone in this shallow thought.

Other than that, they don't bother me too much, their talk and opinions are sane and on point generally although there may be just a bit of a "full of themselves" hint at times and honestly it looks so polite but they way the defer to each other feels to me put on for the cameras. Are they really this polite a home and never are they tired, hungry, have an off day, etc... But all that's just dumb talk by me.

They don't bother me at all but I have at times questioned especially way back with the Kline stuff and some other things, just how they are always in the know... They only follow a few cases I believe and I' sure are all time on it and religiously checking filings constantly but still...

Again they don't bother me.

BUT also again, there are these little things at times one just has to say why? For instance why did they inform the defense in this case IF indeed that is true...? They aren't a party who is writing or filing with a judge and required to copy in the other party. He is an attorney, he knows that. That's odd to me. They notified LE or the prosecutor did they not, and not the judge? All it makes me wonder is did they calll or tell them to see if they could get some info or answers or see what they would say...?

I never thought much about them until @Olenna did her long post on them and then with that color in mind on my next few sightings of them well maybe they do feel a bi saintly and smug but hard to say...

I know I did have some doubts re them back around the Kline thing at first for sure. I almost feel they have a few sources... NOT in a leak fashion but I know I wondered at least once if they weren't helping law enforcement in some fashion with that.

I am sure all my thoughts are wrong but just my thoughts I've had.

And of course on getting info they file FOIA requests a LOT and pursue them. I believe.


They have brought a wealth of info but so do others and I don't see them really as any better or worse than the average podcaster.

They must be better though because top notch Vinnie has them on his show right...? Lol. I'm okay with him for what he and his show and the channel are but I don't rank them up there with some. They try though.


JMO though. I know full well @Olenna can and will speak for herself as to her reasons, plus I know I was not asked and may well get the chair, lol, question wasn't for me after all.
 
I've kept listening to MS b/c they are the only ones in the courtroom and ... that is a very valuable service to their podcast listeners. ... and so good for them on that.

MS has only recently softened their pro-defense attitude.
My impression is that they are learning courtroom dynamics as they go.
My impression is that their "sources" are related to local LE or ISP.
They need to develop sources that are not related to LE.
They need to sharpen their courtroom knowledge - they need a litigation expert as a source; they are missing courtroom dynamics.
They accept that Gull consults with the prosecutor as to what the Prosecutor thinks about disqualifying the Defense that the Prosecutor hates with the intensity of a thousand suns. lol.
It took them far too long to see that Gull failed to give the old Defense the opportunity to be heard.

IF they continue to hold Gull and Prosecution to the same high bar they hold for the Defense ... I'll continue listening. JHMO

I CAN recommend this podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@ProsecutorsPodcast
See: "Live" as well as the other sections.
MS is very friendly with "The Prosecutors"; and this podcast just won the people's choice award at whatever society does crime-podcasting awards.

I've found them to have a good handle on this case.
 

this is from the SC case lawfirm's twitter (x) site,
on occasion they tweet answering Q's about what's been submitted under ALLEN, etc.

another:


The quotes below are from the above tweets. The law firm's explaining (briefly) some of its position in layman's terms. These are technical arguments about the law and it's framework designed to protect rights and ensures fairness (as well as can be).

IMO, interesting. Especially as it illustrates the nerdy side of the superior (supreme) court's watchdog role over judicial overreach. JMHO

Wieneke Law Office, LLC
@Wienekelo

Respectfully, it is not about the Judge. This is about the court's authority. We are a government of limited authority. A court can only act when it has been granted authority to do so.
Wieneke Law Office, LLC
@Wienekelo


Find a case in Indiana that allows for an attorney to be removed from a case for "gross negligence." I'll wait.
 
The Court also has many other remedies to manage/control/subdue over-zealous or poor judgement of members of the Court.

Sanctions. Contempt of Court. Tighter Court guidelines/rules about filings. The power to block a brief and demand it be revised to meet court's briefing standards. The power to redact. The power to permit confidential filings. on and on and on.

I understand Gull took the Defense to task in the past for stuff she didn't like - good for her. But I'm not aware she'd ever assessed a Sanction, or found them in contempt.

JHMO
 
I've kept listening to MS b/c they are the only ones in the courtroom and ... that is a very valuable service to their podcast listeners. ... and so good for them on that.

MS has only recently softened their pro-defense attitude.
My impression is that they are learning courtroom dynamics as they go.
My impression is that their "sources" are related to local LE or ISP.
They need to develop sources that are not related to LE.
They need to sharpen their courtroom knowledge - they need a litigation expert as a source; they are missing courtroom dynamics.
They accept that Gull consults with the prosecutor as to what the Prosecutor thinks about disqualifying the Defense that the Prosecutor hates with the intensity of a thousand suns. lol.
It took them far too long to see that Gull failed to give the old Defense the opportunity to be heard.

IF they continue to hold Gull and Prosecution to the same high bar they hold for the Defense ... I'll continue listening. JHMO

I CAN recommend this podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@ProsecutorsPodcast
See: "Live" as well as the other sections.
MS is very friendly with "The Prosecutors"; and this podcast just won the people's choice award at whatever society does crime-podcasting awards.
Aha, just ran into your response.

I agree they have some LE source and said as much.

They do always attend and that is of value and they are on top of the case and that is of value.

I knew she asked the proscutor but am unsure if the defense never took a stance, we know the "thief" put in an affdavit, did the defense ever say anything to her on where they stood, what they would answer or not in chambers or in court?

I have seen most but not 100 percent on that one.

I don't like as a rule those who cross from pro-defense types or pro-prosecution nor attys that switch sides either. I see for instance that new attorney has worked on both sides in his career, not uncommon but two different animals for sure...

As far as the winner of people's choice, that was at Crime Con was it not?
 

this is from the SC case lawfirm's twitter (x) site,
on occasion they tweet answering Q's about what's been submitted under ALLEN, etc.

another:


The quotes below are from the above tweets. The law firm's explaining (briefly) some of its position in layman's terms. These are technical arguments about the law and it's framework designed to protect rights and ensures fairness (as well as can be).

IMO, interesting. Especially as it illustrates the nerdy side of the superior (supreme) court's watchdog role over judicial overreach. JMHO

I agree with the commenter and I'd also like to know from the law firm just how many cases IN has had where repeated things like this have been done by the defense and what judge was in force and what club he/she played in. I HAVE as attorneys and others everywhere and in IN are saying have never seen anything like this and this Weineke law firm talks as if it is common. Wow. They should think before they speak. Or is he talking like gross negligence on some small potatoes kind of case? If what he talks of is true there is a problem in IN big time. Oh now I see he is from SC, home of Murdaugh and their good ol' boy system... :thud:
 
I agree with the commenter and I'd also like to know from the law firm just how many cases IN has had where repeated things like this have been done by the defense and what judge was in force and what club he/she played in. I HAVE as attorneys and others everywhere and in IN are saying have never seen anything like this and this Weineke law firm talks as if it is common. Wow. They should think before they speak. Or is he talking like gross negligence on some small potatoes kind of case? If what he talks of is true there is a problem in IN big time. Oh now I see he is from SC, home of Murdaugh and their good ol' boy system... :thud:
I think the Q is how many IN lawsuits for gross negligence are filed against attnys by disgruntled (rightly/wrongly) clients? That is the frequency of accusations against lawyers by other lawyers as to gross negligence. Yet the frequency of any IN court removing a defendant's preferred counsel for GN is = ZERO.
 
The Court also has many other remedies to manage/control/subdue over-zealous or poor judgement of members of the Court.

Sanctions. Contempt of Court. Tighter Court guidelines/rules about filings. The power to block a brief and demand it be revised to meet court's briefing standards. The power to redact. The power to permit confidential filings. on and on and on.

I understand Gull took the Defense to task in the past for stuff she didn't like - good for her. But I'm not aware she'd ever assessed a Sanction, or found them in contempt.

JHMO
She warned them and let me tell you most judges won't find an atty in contempt or sanction and for sure the first time depending on proof and how egregious. She is far from alone in that. Most don't do it with parties either with contempt, etc., they threaten it but unless big don't do it. All jmo.

Also you say she took them to task in past but were not I thought in agreement had it proceeded to the courtroom here and her taking them to task. I am just a bit confused or do you mean she should have in chambers in which case that is what she did or now you think it should have been a public licking?
 
I think the Q is how many IN lawsuits for gross negligence are filed against attnys by disgruntled (rightly/wrongly) clients? That is the frequency of accusations against lawyers by other lawyers as to gross negligence. Yet the frequency of any IN court removing a defendant's preferred counsel for GN is = ZERO.
Put out by a SC attorney. To also come to the "zero" one would have to know the Q part of it. I find it a publicly put out opinion without much basis no different than some podcaster throwing such out there.

The Q is yes an issue. Did he give any examples or names of the cases of which he talks that deserved such?

Also, what does he have to say about Murdaugh? And when and how SC should have banned him, sanctioned him, disbarred him, stopped him through the years? Did he complain? I mean there is no WAY you can be an attorney in SC and not have known about the Ms.

Just sayin'... Chair me if you like. It doesn't phase me. Ask dirty bird. May be due to my heritage.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,657
Members
966
Latest member
pizzalover
Back
Top Bottom