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:
Wondered if defense attorneys interfered with such....

And did he ever confess to his attorneys?

Did I not mention that recently...?

Differing opinions there...

Imo, the D and the family stopped him from doing such...
 
She thought Dr. Walla was great in testimony.

She thought Gull was excellent.

It may seem long but again first 40 minutes are the one I already watched separately last night and I am before work with limited time and it is flying by and very interesting to listen to.
 
Minor detail lol.

Of the two they think Baldwin would be better one to present for defense. But he spent a whole day with his shirt untucked in the back.
 
Okay, so it has been a month, I thought so and this is about 43 minutes and sounds like no live chat so just a separate video covering all he hasn't that's happened in the last month. That t works for me. Sounds as if there will be a live chat he said Tuesday (assuming he means this Tuesday?). I'll have to see.

He doesn't usually go this long IF there has been news so can only guess he's been on vacation or something.
Yes he explains what he was doing in the video - he's been travelling round Europe cooking with strangers LOL.
Is the Prozac supposed to be the mental health meds or are there others?

We all know Prozac is typically used to treat depression and pretty sure depression has been mentioned before. I'd point out and probably did then that alcohol is a depressant and so his usages of things seem a bit counterproductive.

it has other uses but again the depression was mentioned.

I forgot to comment on this part of your post so came back to do it.
This was what he was on way before the murders - He's 51 now so that is 26 years he has been on Prozac. Wala put him on medication (Haldol) for schizoprenhia
(has been mentioned before.) So he was then on both.
 
Last edited:
She thought Dr. Walla was great in testimony.

She thought Gull was excellent.

It may seem long but again first 40 minutes are the one I already watched separately last night and I am before work with limited time and it is flying by and very interesting to listen to.
I have now listened to these two and they have some great points, like why doesn't RA just confess to the judge in court. They also said about the bibles that RA wanted to give to the families. They said can you imagine what the families would think of that, meaning they wouldn't want them of course. Why would you want a bible from your daughter's killer. He is really screwed up.
 
Last edited:
Yes he explains what he was doing in the video - he's been travelling round Europe cooking with strangers LOL.

This was what he was on way before the murders - He's 51 now so that is 26 years he has been on Prozac. Wala put him on medication (Haldol) for schizoprenhia
(has been mentioned before.) So he was then on both.
I've heard long term use of mental health drugs can be really dangerous.
 
Yes he explains what he was doing in the video - he's been travelling round Europe cooking with strangers LOL.

This was what he was on way before the murders - He's 51 now so that is 26 years he has been on Prozac. Wala put him on medication (Haldol) for schizoprenhia
(has been mentioned before.) So he was then on both.
Yeah, I'm interested in seeing Tom do that. I think I'd do something like that if I could. Well MAYBE. I kind of like making my own things BUT for a few certain top dishes and recipes, perhaps I would... And the chance to dine on them of course lol. But though I once would have, I would not go to Italy or France now if someone paid me to go. Ireland, perhaps.

I know he was on it beforehand, but it is an antidepressant but then he consumed alcohol which is a depressant.

As for the Haldol, I am on the second thing of Tom's now and got through most of it this morning and his two guests attended the hearings and from what they said, he was not diagnosed with schizophrenia. If I heard it right, he exhibited some types of schizo behavior which is the same whatsoever.

That second show is WELL worth the watch, they both are but that was QUITE an interesting discussion. I still have some to finish but will be easy because so interesting. For the most part, Tom is just letting the two talk and again they attended the hearings.
 
Yeah, I'm interested in seeing Tom do that. I think I'd do something like that if I could. Well MAYBE. I kind of like making my own things BUT for a few certain top dishes and recipes, perhaps I would... And the chance to dine on them of course lol. But though I once would have, I would not go to Italy or France now if someone paid me to go. Ireland, perhaps.

I know he was on it beforehand, but it is an antidepressant but then he consumed alcohol which is a depressant.

As for the Haldol, I am on the second thing of Tom's now and got through most of it this morning and his two guests attended the hearings and from what they said, he was not diagnosed with schizophrenia. If I heard it right, he exhibited some types of schizo behavior which is the same whatsoever.

That second show is WELL worth the watch, they both are but that was QUITE an interesting discussion. I still have some to finish but will be easy because so interesting. For the most part, Tom is just letting the two talk and again they attended the hearings.
Yes i did manage to watch some of that too. Didn't finish it though. So this Friday is the next hearing, with the morning private but the afternoon is public. I wonder what they are discussing privately?
 
I have now listened to these two and they have some great points, like why doesn't RA just confess to the judge in court. They also said about the bibles that RA wanted to give to the families. They said can you imagine what the families would think of that, meaning they wouldn't want them of course. Why would you want a bible from your daughter's killer. He is really screwed up.
It was good wasn't it?!

They mentioned both things, the way he offered the pictures for free and now would give them his Bible. They went on to say some very interesting things. And they are NOT, I want to make clear assuming he is guilty, they've talked of both possibilities, etc. '

But they said these acts or wanting to do such is notable and I forget the words and also that IF HE IS THE KILLER, it puts those things in a far different light, and they are odd enough as it is.

The bible particularly.

BOTH agree this killer is BEYOND controlled and organized and SHE talks of this is another level of killer all together. He agrees and thinks this was super planned as well. And if he IS the killer basically we are dealing with someone very chameleon like, an ultra game player more. I am very much paraphrasing, I don't remember how to put it but it's maybe the most interesting thing in it and there were a TON of interesting things. He agreed with her entirely and added his own takes.

I've said many times I see him as I see CB in LISK. A total fake, game playing, serial killer or would have been type. A wolf in sheep's clothing. They are talking next level even.

I think his persona has been fake probably a good part or most of his life honestly.

They also mentioned the things he IS actually diagnosed with are the garden variety of mental diagnoses. I'll not comment on my thoughts on such. Most can probably imagine.

The talk though about there probably being some kind of psychosis at a point or he does, and he is talking with the doctor said if I recall, and it talks of the type of person who despite that, can control their behaviors and choose them or some such and so on...

These aren't the only subjects either. They cover a ton.

Best coverage of these hearings I've seen yet. I need to try to remember to try to find his channel, if anyone does, let me know. I'm not sure if she has one or not. I knew of her name the minute I heard it but can't think of it now but she's been following throughout and did I believe a documentary already.

BOTH shows were good but the second one has the first full one in it so that would cover both. I sure hope Tom's home now at least through trial IF trial goes off. Just the filings we weren't up to date on here or the decisions. And he reads them all for us (because I'm sure not going to read every single one, I cave at times and do a few, try to do the Ps always as they are never lengthy but to the point as they should be, etc. He was gone too long.

They also see absolutely no reason there'd be a plea deal. The State has no reason to offer anything and what good is it to Allen if he gains nothing. It would avoid trial is all but so would a guilty plea, however, no one let him DO one. That was covered I believe too in this one, I forget but pretty sure.

I packed in a ton of info in the two last night and this morning and still need to finish it out.

I'm glad you watched it, I wasn't sure you would because of the length but in my opinion it is a MUST watch. And I hope you felt worth it, it sounds like you did. If you finished, you are ahead of me now lol. I've got a little bit left, not sure what time I will finish out. I want to be able to hear it well and the air conditioner is running right now. Also just got home.
 
Yes i did manage to watch some of that too. Didn't finish it though. So this Friday is the next hearing, with the morning private but the afternoon is public. I wonder what they are discussing privately?
Didn't finish which one? Thought you did from what you said.

The two don't believe for a minute it is a plea deal. In fact they covered something about IN and I am trying to remember, but I believe it was that to get a plea deal they have to plead guilty first to a judge for a judge to even hear anything suggesting such, etc. Different than most states. I would have to listen again and that's not going to happen. Some people out there they said think that's what it is about but they don't think so.

It was described as a status hearing wasn't it? it could have to do with anything. What can and can't be said in court, what words used, etc. Now generally these are public but in this case, little has been that would taint a jury. Could be a witness problem. Could be anything.

But they have not even announced the public portion as to what it is have they? And maybe it does pertaining to a plea but I tend to not think so.
 
And this does go back and forth both sides with them. Now she is saying how capable of attorneys the two defense attorneys are, knocked the other side, loss of things and more and said if no one thinks this isn't going to come up, they aren't thinking right. Paraphrasing.

Yet earlier in the video she also went on about how the P was very prepared and the D was not, and it isn't that she was changing her mind, it is that she is covering both sides of it.

This is a good watch no matter what one's position. It probably won't offer much for anyone who thinks RL did it, no offense emu. And she even says people poo pooing the O thing need to realize there really are Odinists but they don't sacrifice people, much less white children, and she doesn't think that was what happened here but she says who knows you could have an O whose group does not sacrifice but he's a psychopath in his own right or some such... I think it's her sticking up a bit for the defense, not sure,

But it was just a good ALL AROUND discussion of all the things that came out in hearings and more.
 
Didn't finish which one? Thought you did from what you said.

The two don't believe for a minute it is a plea deal. In fact they covered something about IN and I am trying to remember, but I believe it was that to get a plea deal they have to plead guilty first to a judge for a judge to even hear anything suggesting such, etc. Different than most states. I would have to listen again and that's not going to happen. Some people out there they said think that's what it is about but they don't think so.

It was described as a status hearing wasn't it? it could have to do with anything. What can and can't be said in court, what words used, etc. Now generally these are public but in this case, little has been that would taint a jury. Could be a witness problem. Could be anything.

But they have not even announced the public portion as to what it is have they? And maybe it does pertaining to a plea but I tend to not think so.
I saw the 42 minute one completely. Then i watched his second one skipping the 42 minutes i had already seen and watched most of the interview with Hannah Shakespeare and the other guy. (Aldan someone ? who has a youtube channel.) I only just now caught up on about their last 15 minutes where they are chatting and speculating a bit. They actually mentioned going to interview PW but they didn't disclose what they talked about or why they went. They also poo poohed that all the discovery was left with RA as that is not usual because of the risk it could get out to the gen pop. Hannah said usually a clerk would visit and read the discovery to the client in jail. Aldan said that he has heard of legal documents being shared with clients.

My thought on this is that we have heard previously that he ate the discovery, so they must have given it to him right?

So now i have seen it all.
 
Last edited:
I saw the 42 minute one completely. Then i watched his second one skipping the 42 minutes i had already seen and watched most of the interview with Hannah Shakespeare and the other guy. (Aldan someone ? who has a youtube channel.) I only just now caught up on about their last 15 minutes where they are chatting and speculating a bit. They actually mentioned going to interview PW but they didn't disclose what they talked about or why they went. They also poo poohed that all the discovery was left with RA as that is not usual because of the risk it could get out to the gen pop. Hannah said usually a clerk would visit and read the discovery to the client in jail. Aldan said that he has heard of legal documents being shared with clients.

My thought on this is that we have heard previously that he ate the discovery, so they must have given it to him right?

So now i have seen it all.
I had no idea how much of it you had watched. Yeah, she referred to him eating one paper I think and whether discovery or legal docs... it does make sense he did not get the kazillion terabytes of discovery, one would think anyhow. I found it a really good discussion but she played both sides of the coin here and there quite a bit, but then nothing is decided.

Yeah she was referring to what an attorney she knew told her, that she'd never leave discovery with a client in jail and in this case in a prison.

I don't know that it matters if some discovery or some legal filings or whatever it was was dumped on him. He seemed to think he was doomed immediately after receiving such and something could have been pointed out in a legal filing as well as to something they knew.

All was interesting I felt but the MOST interesting part was what a game playing, manipulative, controlling, uber planning culprit this was and if RA, what his giving free pics and wanting to give his Bible to the family would mean, and already does mean even if not the culprit. If he is and he likely is most feel, that's a nasty head game for lack of a better term. They put it better, I just lack the words this early morn.

Had I had more time, I would have shared more but as it is all I can do is highly recommend a watch. They covered a LOT said at the hearings too. She both planned his attorneys but then at the end also talked of them as intelligent and so on. Kind of did both sides of the coin at times but still, all interesting and understandable.

I found his YT channel and subscribed. I didn't take a look or watch anything on it but did go and find it. I'll see if I get time but found his discussion in Tom's very good so it should be similar.

The thing also is both attend these things and we don't have great coverage to date and this was pretty darned good.

Could't begin to cover all the points. Also gave a lot of insight into the courtroom and people actually there and how all came across. Just good. Imo.

I'm still not sure this will go off in October. If they lose on most all motions, they well could file with the ISC again although I don't know why bother although I guess for them why not...
 
I had no idea how much of it you had watched. Yeah, she referred to him eating one paper I think and whether discovery or legal docs... it does make sense he did not get the kazillion terabytes of discovery, one would think anyhow. I found it a really good discussion but she played both sides of the coin here and there quite a bit, but then nothing is decided.

Yeah she was referring to what an attorney she knew told her, that she'd never leave discovery with a client in jail and in this case in a prison.

I don't know that it matters if some discovery or some legal filings or whatever it was was dumped on him. He seemed to think he was doomed immediately after receiving such and something could have been pointed out in a legal filing as well as to something they knew.

All was interesting I felt but the MOST interesting part was what a game playing, manipulative, controlling, uber planning culprit this was and if RA, what his giving free pics and wanting to give his Bible to the family would mean, and already does mean even if not the culprit. If he is and he likely is most feel, that's a nasty head game for lack of a better term. They put it better, I just lack the words this early morn.

Had I had more time, I would have shared more but as it is all I can do is highly recommend a watch. They covered a LOT said at the hearings too. She both planned his attorneys but then at the end also talked of them as intelligent and so on. Kind of did both sides of the coin at times but still, all interesting and understandable.

I found his YT channel and subscribed. I didn't take a look or watch anything on it but did go and find it. I'll see if I get time but found his discussion in Tom's very good so it should be similar.

The thing also is both attend these things and we don't have great coverage to date and this was pretty darned good.

Could't begin to cover all the points. Also gave a lot of insight into the courtroom and people actually there and how all came across. Just good. Imo.

I'm still not sure this will go off in October. If they lose on most all motions, they well could file with the ISC again although I don't know why bother although I guess for them why not...
Re going to the ISC again they would just clearly be delaying now. Better to go to trial and use any complaints for any subsequent appeal. Their client has virtually set himself up for an insanity plea now IMO. Plus, i just remembered, they said that he has PDP disorder meaning he depended on his wife for a lot. Primary Dependant Person disorder or some such title. Will have to look that up.
 
These are Part 1 (50 minutes) and 2 (53 minutes) from the recent Aspen Connor's youtubes of the 3 Day hearings.







Plus one that is scheduled for today to be aired in 3 hours time.

 
Last edited:
Re going to the ISC again they would just clearly be delaying now. Better to go to trial and use any complaints for any subsequent appeal. Their client has virtually set himself up for an insanity plea now IMO. Plus, i just remembered, they said that he has PDP disorder meaning he depended on his wife for a lot. Primary Dependant Person disorder or some such title. Will have to look that up.
I personally feel he ISC showed the last time, don't bother again. And I felt that was over but Hannah mentioned such in Tom's video and thought depending on if not allowed any other defense, they might. She wasn't a for sure or anything but could see it and see this being delayed by such again... And that's probably part of why they do it too, if they feel Gull won't delay or believe their grounds for delay, they stall with another appeal to the ISC.

I wasn't thinking such would happen though so I get ya.

He can't plead insanity??? HOW? They have avoided going that route, they want to use mental problems and stress of being in a prison but they don't want that done, him tested and so on, nor did they ever want the P getting his records.

Also there's no evidence of insanity when he killed the girls which is when imo he has to have been insane. No?

His things he is diagnosed with are very common and I called them a garden variety of things, meaning exactly that, these things "grow" everywhere. This disorder, that depression, very general. Hannah said the same but used another adjective, but something similar.

Yes more than once it is mentioned it was the wife he is so dependent on. I don't know if this is known from the psych doctor and testimony perhaps I'd guess?

However, I'm going to guess he was that way with mom or mom helped make him that way, one or the other and then it transferred to wife...

I find it a crock and a great way to avoid responsibility and put all of it on the partner, parent, whoever.

Anyhow they can't have an insanity please without having pursued the right examinations and more and again, I don't think his sanity has been questioned at all at the time of the murders. All they've said is about being in prison having caused such things.
 
These are Part 1 (50 minutes) and 2 (53 minutes) from the recent Aspen Connor's youtubes of the 3 Day hearings.







Plus one that is scheduled for today to be aired in 3 hours time.


I found him last night too or maybe it was this morning (but think last night). I didn't watch anything but simply subscribed so at least I can find him now when need be if I forget the name, etc. He is DEFINITELY ONE covering it and who will be at every minute of trial imo so now we have someone to watch. May take him some time to get it all out when a how many week trial but we should eventually hear a lot more of the testimony than we heard from regular reporters about simply a few days of hearings.

Did you watch any of these? I'm sure they'd have even more than Tom's show because a lot of that was him asking questions or chat with questions but then the two guests would go into some things as a result of answering something and Tom did not want to keep them all night either, but in his own shows and he has several it seems just covering the hearings, that you just linked, he probably covers every single thing he took notes on. His memory was VERY good of things said in court on Tom's show. He even reminded Hannah a few times, remember when this or that was said? I don't mean she didn't recall without him doing that, I have no idea, but he would bring things up he recalled which he though related to whatever the topic being talked of.
 

Forum statistics

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