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:
Ref:

paragraph 1.1 states therein;
"When bullets are fired and cartridge cases ejected from a firearm,
the parts of the firearm that make forcible contact with them create
characteristic tool marks on their surfaces called ‘ballistic signatures’ [2].
Striation signatures (2D profile tool marks) on a bullet are caused by
its passage through the gun barrel (see figure 1 [3]). Impression
signatures (3D topography tool marks) on a cartridge case are caused
by impact with the firing pin, breech face and ejector (see figure 2 [3])."

Also, the picture and text of Figure 2 makes it very clear the assertions
being made are made in relation to Fired pieces of ammunition.

There is nothing in that document that references unfired pieces of
ammunition and the word unfired does not appear anywhere in that
document.
-------------------

@Cousin Dupree said:
"This is from December 17, 2022
I found this quote very interesting:
Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland has openly stated
that he believes 'Allen is not the only actor involved in this.'
"

I predict, and will bet you a stack of chairs, that his 'belief' is BSincorrect
and that absolutley no such evidence will be produced at trial, of any
involvement by RA in any 'child sex' matters.

Thanks, that saves me from looking through the whole page.
 
GrandmaBear said: "So now it is a casing again and not a bullet?"
It's this, an unfired round of ammunition, .40 S&W Calibre :

GrandmaBear said: "Allen places himself there, having parked there."
Well, the PCA alleges this is what Allen said (NOTE: the PCA absolutely
fails to give a direct quote, therefore what we are getting is at best, an
interpretation of what Allen said, or at worst, a mis-representation of
what Allen said, in line with others falsehoods in the PCA like the
'muddy and bloody' falsehood)...
Page 4 of the PCA: {investigators cite a 'tip narrative'}( i.e. the conversation
with DNR Dan Dulin, who incidently now claims he can't find the audio
tape of the conversation he had with Allen - how convenient.)
DNR Dan alleges Allen said that 'He parked at the old Farm Bureau building'.

and Page 5 of the PCA cites a October 13, 2022a interview, wherein, dropped
amongst a paragraph of ridiculously jumbled information, is parachuted the
following assertion, that Allen 'stated he parked his car on the side of an old
building'.

As to where Allen ACTUALLY parked, although his previous Defense didn't
challenge the idea it was at the former CPS building, we have nothing directly,
unequivocally, as to where he meant he parked. Why not? Because Liggett
never bothered to show him a map and ask him to identify the place he parked,
because Liggett is at best careless if falsehoods are included in the PCA,
like the 'muddy and bloody' falsehood.

This is all gone into in the Memorandum, about page 109 and thereabouts,
including the fact that witness Betsy Blair, at or about 2:15 P.M., DID NOT
see a black, ford focus car at the CPS site but rather a car that was NOT
BLACK and that looked in side view, similar to the (angular) side profile of
a 1965 Ford (i.e. Mercury) Comet, this information being found in a report
of Liggett which has been entered into Court documents as Exhibit 105,
paragraphs 4 and 6 on page 1 (thereof).
So now we know, Allen drove a black ford focus and it wasn't at the CPS
building, where Liggett alleges it was, at or about, 2:15P.M..

Beddy Bye
You know it is way easier to follow if instead of tagging every person you simply use the reply button under the post you are replying to and that way all know which post you are responding to of the many here from all. The tagging you've added helps some, far better than a response like you were doing of where one couldn't tell even WHO or WHICH post you were responding to but you still have not fixed the WHICH post part.

Good points for sure. Most. From a one sided perspective but some seem valid.

I am going to assume (hopefully not erroneously) that RA's more recent interviews are fully recorded and we sure have not seen them and the defense is not going to insert anything that doesn't swing their way. LE would have been nuts not to go over all these details and questions with Allen again at this point before he could possibly later lawyer up. AND record it. I'd assume also they would have a recordings with the witnesses, the only one mentioned as lost is Dulin's.

I am not a fan of Dulin as he seemingly allegedly bumbled this and delayed justice for years on end as he couldn't even get the last name right in the data entry field and instead had the street name as RA's last name or so it is said...Something on that order anyhow... Is what is alleged.

And I disagree with our ending completely of "now we know". No, we really don't. This case isn't all out there, it has not been tried and we have only defense driven filings with selective points. We have never heard a single interview of anyone unless you count the side angle of KK but that's not part of this case.

We only just now got the other side in the Murdaugh case and this one we may never hear the other side or all the facts at this rate.

The defense's job is not to bring all the prosecution's facts, it is quite the opposite. The defense's job also is to try to ensure we NEVER hear any damning evidence or statements that do not help their client. Like fully what he said of parking that day and like a WORD of his ORAL confessions. And we haven't have we? Or did I miss something?
 
Well that's a horrible news story.:shocked: And sounds nothing like what came out in the PCA. Did this story get widely debunked? Or are we still expecting cat DNA and a rape and a souvenir at RL's house? :censored:

I couldn't listen to that. It was too messed up for me to understand. confused-animated-smiley.gif
 
Amicus Brief.pdf

Amicus Brief submitted to SCION re: 11/6/23 motion from RA - by the Indiana Public Defender Council (IDPC)
The Indiana Public Defender Council states its interest in this 11/6/23 matter in front of SCION and writes their argument.

This Amicus brief does reinforce the obvious rights of RA to the counsel of choice BUT
the IDCP adds its own NEW ISSUE to the 11/6/23 brief by asserting that Gull's bypassed the County process for appointing public defenders by
making the decision for RA's new counsel on her own and pulling in her home-team as new counsel rather than following the proper County process in place ... which puts considerable SPACE between the ruling Court and the selection of the public defender for RA. The Judge's relationships to the new P's she has selected - even the appearance of it - this IDPC asserts will interfere with fairness of RA's case.

So, bottom line ... ignoring all the rest ... this Amicus argues at the minimum that Judge Gull's newly selected counsel to replace the Old D's need to go.
They recommend the Old D be returned to the case ... for all the obvious reasons ... as to RA's civil rights. Or, in the very least that Carroll Cty's PD system is followed and Carroll county finds the new D's.
I've been reading through the thread again this morning and I'm now unclear about something. Isn't this their motion to appear and not a brief? It seems like they're asking for their permission from the court to file their brief.
 
It was verifying the time they were dropped off, by the video from the Hoosier store. So they were only on the trails for 24 minutes before they met that murderer. 1.49 pm they were dropped off. Walked to the bridge and crossed, then at 2.13 Libby filmed him and thank goodness she did.

Have you read the PCA?
He hasn't and he never watched all of his Court TV link he posted either because I finished it I think it was yesterday morning (had just minutes left to watch) and something he claimed not to know was in it clear as a bell and is in the PCA as well. And other things. The part about the guy looking as if he'd been in a fight was one.

No offense dodo but I finished it and ran right into what you had just been posting about on here, and did not know of and you posted the link. I would have to go back to bring to mind which of the many things it was. But your OWN show talked of it.
 
This is from December 17, 2022

I found this quote very interesting:

Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland has openly stated that he believes 'Allen is not the only actor involved in this.'

And while Allen has not been charged with kidnapping, prosecutors have alleged he attempted it.

Now sources close to the investigation have claimed that Allen was acting with at least two other men and was involved in a child sex ring.
Since I don't know what the evidence is that could even suggest that there was more than one perp, I can't speak to those conclusions.
Re a conspiracy of some kind, if there's evidence that anyone had prior knowledge of not only where Abby and Libby would be but when, I don't know what it is.
 
He puts himself there. He's on camera. His gun matches the bullet found. He has been recorded by the victims and described by the witnesses. He is toast.

The PCA is grounds for his arrest. All the evidence will be fully explained in court.
I cannot get over how some think all goes into a PCA or that all is even said at either a PC hearing or a preliminary. No offense but same would apply in Morphew.

it is NEVER all. It has not been tried.

Likewise defense filings NEVER include all nor anything not helpful to their client. Man if people got into lying by omission, it sure does not apply to defenses withholding something on THEIR side that does not help their client or bringing it forward.
 
About half of it so far. We know when they were dropped off due to one of their parents dropping them off. We also know when they were supposed to be picked up. I don't understand why seeing the car dropping them off is important.
Uhm timeline? Establishing they really were there and when and at what spot and when? This is the beginning chapter of a new court case and don't you have to provide that the said victims were even there or the start of the story and place them there? Seems to me that would be missing a critical detail if you can't even place them there that day until finding their bodies.

This case is affecting most of us I think but I think you are getting blinders to even small things that aren't questionable and make perfect sense and getting hung up on things that truly are not questionable and cannot be made into an issue, like this.

In all sympathy, I think you need to clear your windshield like I said.

Kelsey dropped them off at the spot she did at a certain time and this is corroborated I am pretty certain. Of course you do this so it cannot be disputed and that fact isn't, to my knowledge because they can't. Funny those two haven't tried that yet though. Old D. That's how ludicrous it has become imo that nothing would surprise me.

I am pages and pages behind and so this will probably fall when you have already been responded to.
 
I cannot get over how some think all goes into a PCA or that all is even said at either a PC hearing or a preliminary. No offense but same would apply in Morphew.
I hadn't realized how (among other things) bias the info contained in a PCA can be until I read the one against Logan.
I'm still dismayed that a document containing such shoddy info can be approved by a judge.
 
Who's on camera hasn't been proven one way or another.
You know we need to remember this case has not been tried and there hasn't been a full release of all evidence or even close except for what the defense wanted leaked. And I think it needs to be said the prosecution has steadfastly maintained keeping things as they should, not out there for public consumption. They also did not respond in kind to the thousands of pages of b.s. filed with the O thing. They hit the point of law on it and left it at that and did not get all down and dirty and juvenile with a tit for tat. The professionalism, no matter what one thinks of the prosecution, of one side versus the other speaks for itself.
 
There WAS a bullet. I always thought so then someone go me thinking I had it wrong and it was a casing but I could not recall who and now i figure it was likely the emu and here he is doing it again after I was corrected back to bullet he says there wasn't one. i am STICKING with bullet regardless of whatever the heck is true with regard to casing. there dam* well WAS a bullet. :nope: to emu.
Yes there was and from what I recall it was found between the two girls? But don’t quote me on that.
 
The ejection marks would be on the casing and the actual business end of the bullet itself would be intact since they know it was unspent, otherwise they would not be stating that it was ejected and unspent. Nobody is going to just load a casing into a weapon without the business end being with it. Pretty sure you won't be able to even load and chamber just a casing. Not positive on that one since I haven't spent much time around hand guns. I've mostly been around rifles and shot guns.
When I took my gun safety class, they said that the markings come from going down the barrel. If it went down the barrel, it would’ve ignited so I don’t think they’re going to find any unique markings to match a firearm. They could find out that it’s the same type of a bullet as a bunch of other rounds that are found in someone’s house though.
 
The whole bullet is ejected and the ejection marks are then on it. I posted info about the science upthread. Will repost.

Yes, it was in the gun which was then racked and ejected the whole unspent bullet.

An empty casing is what is ejected after a bullet is fired. The bullet and casing will be separate, with the casing on the floor near where it was fired and the bullet in or near the target that was shot at.
Depends on the fire arm. My 9 mm has a magazine and you can eject bullets out of that without any marking.
 
I think Logan may have looked to them like the man on the bridge simply because they knew he lived nearby. In other words, if the crime had occurred across town, I don't think they would have associated Logan and the man on the bridge.
Sadly, eyewitnesses can be unreliable.
 
He was the only adult male on the trail at the same time as the girls and admitted he was there. Libby filmed him. They don't actually need any DNA.
Man I am trying to catch up quickly on a day off and relax and then move onto a ton I have to deal with today and start it out right and this is already giving me a headache.

Not you. The case. His doubts about everything and in every direction. Yes Emu, I mean you. Last night as well the bit I was able to get through.

And that's okay. All have opinions but man I feel it is like beating one's head on the wall in some respects lately and I'm not even here all the time.

I haven't even been here to give you multiple pages of screen the past few days lol. You though filled mine one day I think surpassed any I have given you. I am not a big phone person but was at work and checked it on break and it was screen after screen after screen lol. Payback right lol. Jk. I think it was what you copied and pasted from the PCA that filled it.

Anyhow just trying to catch up.

I agree. DNA is not present in many succesfully tried cases. It is like some consider it necessary and we did not even used to have it. The defense says there is no DNA but who knows. And if there isn't there isn't. It has become some gold standard and a rare juror even seems to expect it and it seems to be a CSI effect. Hollywood is to blame for so much and I love to blame them. They also help perps know WATCH for your DNA if planning to commit a crime.

ALL the murders she is suspected of, I don't think there is a bit of Lori Daybell's DNA in any of them. And she was convicted. And will be again. Murdaugh was convicted and not a bit of it was about DNA. Letecia Stauch was convicted and I don't think any of the case was about her DNA found. And I'm just citing some recent ones. I dare say MOST do not have it. Not conclusively anyhow.

We have the Idaho 4 murders and BK's DNA was found on the sheath, WAS FOUND. There IS DNA! And yet some like to spread doubt about that and how it is not enough. SMH.

RA was the sole male on the trails. RA was the man on the bridge. RA is BG. RA parked from the right direction and walked back to his car in the right direction and details on that can be debated as to car color, "which old building" etc. This will all come up at trial. The thing is defenses try to try the case BEFORE trial and only one side is playing there is a trial going on when there isn't. The other side is not sharing.

And so many fall for this. Smdh.
 
Ref:

paragraph 1.1 states therein;
"When bullets are fired and cartridge cases ejected from a firearm,
the parts of the firearm that make forcible contact with them create
characteristic tool marks on their surfaces called ‘ballistic signatures’ [2].
Striation signatures (2D profile tool marks) on a bullet are caused by
its passage through the gun barrel (see figure 1 [3]). Impression
signatures (3D topography tool marks) on a cartridge case are caused
by impact with the firing pin, breech face and ejector (see figure 2 [3])."

Also, the picture and text of Figure 2 makes it very clear the assertions
being made are made in relation to Fired pieces of ammunition.

There is nothing in that document that references unfired pieces of
ammunition and the word unfired does not appear anywhere in that
document.
-------------------

@Cousin Dupree said:
"This is from December 17, 2022
I found this quote very interesting:
Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland has openly stated
that he believes 'Allen is not the only actor involved in this.'
"

I predict, and will bet you a stack of chairs, that his 'belief' is BSincorrect
and that absolutley no such evidence will be produced at trial, of any
involvement by RA in any 'child sex' matters.
That's because they are specifically speaking of fired bullets.
 
When I took my gun safety class, they said that the markings come from going down the barrel. If it went down the barrel, it would’ve ignited so I don’t think they’re going to find any unique markings to match a firearm. They could find out that it’s the same type of a bullet as a bunch of other rounds that are found in someone’s house though.
They have said it had not been fired so there would be no barrel markings
 
Sadly, eyewitnesses can be unreliable.
Especially when asked to remember something that was totally irrelevant to the person at the time. They might have thought the car they saw was purple only because they had seen the same kind or similar car recently that was purple, but they did see a car in that lot at that time. Since they weren't paying attention to that car for any reason, it's no wonder that they didn't remember the exact details since it was not doing anything notable at the time.
 
It was Libby's sister who dropped them off. She was at one point going to go with them but then decided to go and see her boyfriend. It is her name that is blanked out in the PCA but she sure will testify.

It is important to explain the drop off time 1.49pm and the video of BG 2.13 pm in relation to the times all the witnesses were there. I needed to read all the PCA a couple of times to get it. Also, RA had access to two cars, a black one and a grey one. I am sure the Hoosier video of his car will be part of the evidence in court to verify the timeline.
How is it anyone thinks a parent dropped them off. It has long been known to be the sister. She has been on and spoken many times through the years. I need to be fair as my memory fails in some cases lately but this one and that fact is so well known for years in this well known case... A parent of Libby was to pick them up. Sadly that never happened as they weren't there when dad got there.

I am behind the eight ball but days late just said the same about needing to establish a timeline, who dropped them off, when and where.

I know what you mean about reading a few times to see an entirely clear picture that nails it and RA. This is something at trial they need to be as clear as crystal and not hard to follow. They need a full map with animation and people and times and simultaneous times and happenings. It is all there, it is just hard to follow.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,706
Members
967
Latest member
minaji88
Back
Top Bottom