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:
I hadn't looked at the case yet, today. Found it!

11/09/2023
Order Granting Motion to Appear as Amicus Curiae
Being duly advised, the IPDC's "Motion to Appear as Amicus Curiae" is GRANTED, and the Clerk is directed to file the amicus curiae brief as of the date of this order. Respondents may include any response to the amicus curiae brief in their brief opposing the petition. Orig. Act. R. 3(F).
Judicial Officer:
Rush, Loretta H.
Party:
Indiana Public Defender Council
Serve:
Wieneke, Cara Schaefer
Serve:
Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve:
Leeman, Mark Kelly
Serve:
Sanchez, Angela
Serve:
Corley, Bernice Angenett Nickole
Serve:
Schumm, Joel M.
Serve:
Stake, Christopher S.
Serve:
Gutwein, Matthew R
File Stamp:
11/09/2023
11/09/2023
Brief of Amicus Curiae
Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 11/08/23
Attorney:
Corley, Bernice Angenett Nickole
Attorney:
Schumm, Joel M.
Party:
Indiana Public Defender Council
File Stamp:
11/09/2023
Yes!
That's the text I just posted above this post. And they're letting Gull know she can respond to this AMICUS brief within the same brief she responds to RA's brief.

See ya some time after the 27th! :runningaway:Happy Turkey and stuff----ing. :thanksgiving:
 
Q: Does anyone know/recall offhand the elapsed time the P's timeline gives RA for parking, walking, kidnapping, hiking, murdering, blood draining, cleaning, moving, more murdering, more moving, dressing, staging, discarding and reappearing bloody-muddy? :thinking: 🙏
Not very long from what I have just posted in post #2916. Parked 1.26pm left around 3.57 pm by the look of it, so about 2.5 hours altogether. Verified by witness timings and Hoosier store video times.
 
Last edited:
There was RA putting himself there PLUS the 3 girls PLUS a woman PLUS the muddy/bloody witness PLUS the times on Libby's phone and it all agreed. The 3 girls crossing the old state road bridge when they left were seen by the next witness as she arrived so the times all gell. It's in the PCA.

RA himself says he saw the three girls. He didn't see the woman witness because she turned back when she saw him on the bridge.

So how come nobody saw any other dudes or saw their cars on the Hoosier video? And there were no other dudes recorded on Libby's phone either.
@Cousin Dupree how do you reconcile RA seeing the girls and parking whee he said yet you think he is involved in the murders but is not BG? Coming in the way he said, etc.? How do you fix that, do you think he is covering for RL and claiming to be BG instead of RL and that he was on the other end at RL's property and RL drove in from the other direction instead of from his own property, because that makes very little sense wouldn't you say?
 
looking at fish. I'm sorry. I had to.
Fish Laser GIF
 
Right so now I have his movements plus the bullet straight in my mind for when this trial eventually starts. I cannot see how he is going to get around any of this evidence. He would be well served by his defence if they negotiate a plea deal so noone has to go thru all the gruesome details. Enough shenanigans have gone on too long already.
 
The only possibility I could see is the Anthony shots or Emily Anne profiles that KK used. He was in contact with Libby that night before they went to the trail, I believe.
I don't think LE found a connection between KK and the murders or KK and Allen or Allen and either of those two profiles or any other.
Regardless, the theory of a conspiracy has never made sense to me.
 
I guess the word "Guys" was considered too critical for them to let people it preceded "Down the hill."
Half the time or maybe always in a case we don't even get a video they have of a theft or car or person. In time maybe they will release a still image from a video, etc. Not unusual and this was a huge crime. Who knows?

Maybe one day we will know, even years after when old cases are talked of in some show and some detective gets asked what was the reasoning behind that decision?

What I do know is that is Allen's voice. I've rarely been so sure of anything like that in a case in my life. We can go back on this thread just here even and see us debating if the voice was KK's or could be or RL's, etc. I debated it, you debated it, people out there on the internet debated it...

I don't have the time, patience or willpower to go back and look but I do remember saying smoking and/or drinking can do that to a voice and now that KK was in jail he couldn't do those things (drink or smoke) and might sound different yada yada yada.

I thought it COULD be his if I remember correctly and I'm pretty sure I do on that. Of course at the time we never knew a thing about a Richard Allen at least not at first...We thought the case was heating up and hope was on the horizon and it was like between KK or KK and his dad and so on...

My point is I could believe it to be KK allowing for some things to make it fit or be possible and that's the case with many compared UNTIL the other night and that was an OMG moment, that was without a doubt Richard Allen. I already felt the evidence of his guilt was there and I have felt him guilty just about throughout but that was the beautiful icing on the cake. I didn't need to say is it or isn't it or make excuses for the voice match not being exact or being able to be CERTAIN because it was so CLEARLY his voice. No ratio of likelihood, it IS his voice.

What is it you are thinking? That he is saying there are guys at the bottom of the hill? You think he says something like Girls, you see those guys down the hill? Is that where you are going with this, that guys means GUYS and that's why they held it back?

That's Allen's voice. For "guys" to have went in through Logan's property, we'd have to believe Logan was part I think and I've never been sure on Logan. And a problem with that is RA denied knowing Logan/the property owner. Now RA may have lied but one would think someone or many would be aware if he knew Logan or had ever sat at a bar and had a drink with him, etc. And RA SEEMED to admit freely what he had to so as not to be caught in lies and suspected.. He admitted to being in certain locations because he KNEW he had been seen (which further confirms he is BG) by witnesses so I'd logically think if he knew people could say he darned well did know RL, he'd have admitted to it.

I am so far behind in here!
 
Or misquoted it purposely to help get the warrant.
I doubt it because even with muddy and heading in the direction of the car at the right time and all else in it, there is enough to get a warrant imo so even if it is incorrect, one would have to see her statement or hear it, I doubt it was intentional. It is also very possible she did say bloody and put out to public, they left out the bloody because it implied something he did to the girls and how bad it got so left the worse detail out and the defense is spinning this. Hard to say. I don't think that on its own though is going to result in much as proof LE intentionallly lying though. I don't think all of it put together will either. And that's if the lower court ever even gets to the Franks hearing or one is granted. If one IS granted, after SOME judge takes on the year's worth of reading in it, prosecution I am sure will be able to defend their position and we shall see.
 
According to the PCA she does exist. You realise you are saying LE lied in that PCA by saying that, don't you?

How did these other dudes get to and from the bottom of the hill without being see?
Now that's a new one and it is getting ridiculous. That witness has existed from early on and for anyone to believe they insert a witness they can't produce into a legal document is a bit beyond rational thinking.
 
I think they probably had screaming from the girls and swearing from RA to try and edit out. I am sure it will all be heard at trial nevertheless.
IF the words were separated and not said together at the same time, do we know this? it could be in between he was racking the gun, and perhaps saying why he was doing this, giving graphic detail to the girls of what he was going to do to them, and any other of a myriad of things that they don't want the public to know, just as we were never given graphic details like cause of death or the way the bodies were, injuries, etc. Only the defense outs that kind of stuff. Smh.
 
Why did nobody see or hear them and why weren't they on Libby's recording?

And who is BG if it is not RA? It can't be RL because he was not taller than 5'10 and no other male was seen on the bridge at the time he admits being there on the bridge looking at fish.
I'm with you on this one. RA IS BG. I see all that you see. For it not to be as the BIGGEST reason, Allen is lying about being there and where he was at all and there is no reason any sane person would do that. And the voice is the icing on the cake.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,007
Messages
240,710
Members
967
Latest member
minaji88
Back
Top Bottom