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:
In this case and in general, reporting's terrible but like you've said, one's obliviousto it unless already- or subsequently- knowledgable of the facts.

Another problem I see, specific to the article in Tresir's post #8787, whose opinion is it that "the case against Allen relies largely on those confessions"?
Well, they ain't my opinion but indeed, the fact that Allen saw Weber as he returned home puts Allen right there, right then, period.

Re Baldwin questioning Mullin's as to why Weber reviewed texts before his interview, had Baldwin not asked Weber? And was that objected to by the prosecution?
Regardless, it's a defense tactic I observed used in the Read trial where one witness is asked the why another witness did his or that rather than ask that other witness.
EXACTLY. The reporting is SO bad. Thank GOD I know more and most of us do. Very, very one sided and so not a true picture of all going on. It is what it is though, and not atypical I guess but it is a bit in this case. Seems to mostly really lean one way and every since the leak and finding out many out there were getting "fed" info all along, well I'll leave that one right there.

The van is EPIC. HUGE.

Yeah, I'll stay off of talking Read but I get ya. When I went and watched some actual testimony versus posts I saw, that was enough for me.

In both cases, the same kind of BS is going on, same leaks, same PR, etc., similar news, and some fall for it I guess.

Both cases did NOT have perfect investigations.

But in both cases the accused was actually there. Both made incriminating statements if not confessions even.

Stopping with that, other than to finish with both cases send people over the top and it's the intent imo. And it works. On some. All one can do is clear the sn*w, the BS, the blizzard and look at what is actually know and then to me, it's pretty clear.

Just my opinon of course however.

yeah, see the poor reporting? In this one we don't have the advantage of looking at and watching Weber's testimony to find out IF Baldwin asked the ACTUAL person and not seen in any reporting that's for sure. However, to be fair I gave up reading any traditional news links pretty quickly this morning I was fast irritated although did chuckle for a second over "the dense attorney". Lol.
 
I don't find it odd though that Weber reviewed on being called in, I mean what would he think it was about?
Well, it was that defense attorney who ststed in his question that it was "interesting", but yeah, it's not interesting nor odd to me, either, lol!
Re the witness answer that he had no explanation, I take it that he was avoiding speaking for the other witness.
But, I guess, the D is finally doing their job. However, for a man that it seems like would have preferred to plead and already be done with this but the controlling and selifsh people in his life would not let him. Mom. Wife. His self interested attorneys. IMHO. IMHO.
But it's whether they go about doing their job in an ethical manner that matters and to me, accusing others without evidence is unethical, to say the least.
 
Ok so D want the jury to think RA has a mental health problem? I cannot see what good that will do.

Some people are criticizing Bob for missing stuff in his 13 points LOL.

"13. I’m getting comments asking why I didn’t mention X or why I left out Y & Z.

It’s hard to include a day’s worth of testimony in 13 brief points. To see more, check out the 13News Delphi Debrief — Day 13 edition. We can fit in a lot in 48 minutes."

His mental illness would have gotten worse, if denied his meds under stress. I think they're leaning towards explaining his false confessions. I don't know for sure he was denied his meds, but IIRC, it's been claimed.

The account of RAs being interviewed by the cop is really disturbing to me. The cop is angry that he won't play along with him and confess.

To me, it's obvious that they know they had next to nothing, and need a confession, and he won't give them one.

I'd never confess to something I didn’t do. So they psychologically tortured him til he made a confession. The one the psychologist brought up doesn't match the facts.

She said he told her he ejected the bullet at the top of the hill. Then how did it get between them?

Just a lot of hinky stuff.
 
Sounds like another FU. I went to read it but ran into a not corrected/or proofread thing and I had to stop. I had just come from the 'dense attorney" in another article. Can't do it right now lol.

I tell ya, with these rules too, and I didn't in other cases agree with dark days, this jury, the families, all should have a break midweek I swear. How are they getting through all of this? I mean seriously. Of course jury is not seeing the reporting but man... Of course to have a day off here and there, they would end up sequestered longer, but still...

I can't read another thing right now. In two articles, I hit fairly big errors right off and it sent me over.

Not sure why this FU is about but think I read a bit about him using a camera, right, not a cell phone and something last night? I'd get filled in by reading but can't take the reading more of this reporting right now...

You know, I've said more than once, you have as well, there have definitely been some screw ups in this investigation. Some things, a few, that definitely weren't a stellar job. Right now though Im thinking if the reporters were running the investigation, it would have been even worse LOL. I'm not sure they could tell a tree from a rock or a defense attorney from a witness on the stand.

About had my fill for a bit I guess and I hardly got started this morning. Saw more than enough though yesterday too maybe too much tried to pack in.

have had my fill which again tells me how much of a break everyone actually attending probably is in need of.
With McCain's camera, it had a SIM card in it, so he gave that to LE ( ISP and FBI officers) and never saw it again - neither did they apparenty.
 
Well, it was that defense attorney who ststed in his question that it was "interesting", but yeah, it's not interesting nor odd to me, either, lol!
Re the witness answer that he had no explanation, I take it that he was avoiding speaking for the other witness.

But it's whether they go about doing their job in an ethical manner that matters and to me, accusing others without evidence is unethical, to say the least.
You and I don't always agree on all cases lol as we well know but I agree totally here.

There's nothing odd about it and I am disgusted to no end with the D "testifying" and making statements in their "questions" and for anyone to think Gull is not giving them a TON of leeway,, they are really missing a lot. Imo.

Ther's nothing odd to me about the Weber thing. It's quite damning actually.

Yeah, when I say they are finally doing their job, I sure don't mean ethically, believe ME lol. What I meant was I've said all along they never even went and saw their client for how darned long and left him to his own devices with no counsel, etc. but NOW look, just like after he started confessing, they went into full panic mode because imo they FAILED totally and did NOT do their job of seeing to their client. That's what I see and have seen for a long time, and imo they should be disbarred.

Not saying that to bother anyone else or at anyone else, I've said it a million times. It's all known and it's all there if anyone wants to see they failed him. And ever since have been trying to distract from that little key lonely fact.

Again imo. That's my opinion of them based on solid sh*t and has been for a very long time.

Oh well...

Anyhow I certainly lol did not mean it as doing an ethical job but they are actually there and representing him finally lol.
 
There were no clothes seen in the river that night, but they were there the next day. How'd that happen?
It was dark. The clothes were also likely further downstream at the time too. They didn't see the bodies either. That night they were thinking mainly that they could have fallen off the bridge so were looking underneath it.
 
His mental illness would have gotten worse, if denied his meds under stress. I think they're leaning towards explaining his false confessions. I don't know for sure he was denied his meds, but IIRC, it's been claimed.

The account of RAs being interviewed by the cop is really disturbing to me. The cop is angry that he won't play along with him and confess.

To me, it's obvious that they know they had next to nothing, and need a confession, and he won't give them one.

I'd never confess to something I didn’t do. So they psychologically tortured him til he made a confession. The one the psychologist brought up doesn't match the facts.

She said he told her he ejected the bullet at the top of the hill. Then how did it get between them?

Just a lot of hinky stuff.
I think it likely he racked the gun a few times to scare them so it is possible IMO. I seem to remember one magazine in the search inventory had 8 bullets in it. Alternatively he could have pocketed the racked bullet from that time and lost it from his pocket during the murders.

The Holeman interview is just regular police tactics in interviews. The good cop/bad cop still happens but sometimes bad cop works with no good cop needed. A confession is the ideal, but he did admit he had never been in the woods before and had never loaned his gun out so that was all they needed for probable cause.
 
His mental illness would have gotten worse, if denied his meds under stress. I think they're leaning towards explaining his false confessions. I don't know for sure he was denied his meds, but IIRC, it's been claimed.

The account of RAs being interviewed by the cop is really disturbing to me. The cop is angry that he won't play along with him and confess.

To me, it's obvious that they know they had next to nothing, and need a confession, and he won't give them one.

I'd never confess to something I didn’t do. So they psychologically tortured him til he made a confession. The one the psychologist brought up doesn't match the facts.

She said he told her he ejected the bullet at the top of the hill. Then how did it get between them?

Just a lot of hinky stuff.
All he is known to have had as far as mental illness was depression, and I think he may have claimed anxiety.

As you I think know now, the LE interviews with RA were recorded and WERE played. The jury has seen them and as always, which I truly endorse, they can decide if they were doing wrong to him, the jury saw them.

They psychologically tortureed him? All guards, Wala (who actually the D wanted because some of what she says they believe helps them), the warden and all others are in cahoots, and Weber too and all keeping their mouths shut?

I don't mean offense and it certainly is an investigation with its missteps, but just showing the other side to this. It is working as that's what the D wants people to believe. Too far fetched for me.
The bullet at the top of the hill is something I'd speak to I believe I recall from back when, but I don't want to misspeak and would rather be sure I recall it correctly first. Pretty sure I know about it and maybe others have forgotten too.

Regardless can I nicely point out you yourself pick and choose what you believe out of RA's mouth? Some things you do, like the bullet at the top of the hill, but other things you don't. I mean you doubt his confessions right? That he did it? But believe that about the bullet?

You won't agree, but he is a total manipulator.

Since I can't verify it right now, iwhat I think I recall from back when, I will just say about current times, if you recall, it was argued about whether it could be said the gun was racked at the top of the hill... Thought to be heard on Libby's recording LE WANTED to say such but the D argued it... WHY if they want the bullet at the top of the hill?

I am so positive, this is different but I recall something from over the years, but again I'm not going to say it until and if I can verify it.

You know, I cant look at it both ways as you are. You say he was basically tortured into confessing but then what he says in his confessions, some of them you think to be fact like the bullet at the top of the hill? Think about that. How can that be true if he NEVER did this?
 
AND per him, never had a gun with him either...
I think it likely he racked the gun a few times to scare them so it is possible IMO. I seem to remember one magazine in the search inventory had 8 bullets in it. Alternatively he could have pocketed the racked bullet from that time and lost it from his pocket during the murders.

The Holeman interview is just regular police tactics in interviews. The good cop/bad cop still happens but sometimes bad cop works with no good cop needed. A confession is the ideal, but he did admit he had never been in the woods before and had never loaned his gun out so that was all they needed for probable cause.
This is CLOSE to what I am recalling from years past. Long before his "confessions". Not exactly but it is part of it.

I messaged you about this to see if you recall what I think I do...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,491
Members
965
Latest member
tanya
Back
Top Bottom