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:
ETA: whoever killed those defenseless young girls was in control. Almost every adult in the area was better equipped than they were. So why is that a thing at all?

All I want is ALL of the people involved in this to be punished. I'm not just going to sit back and not have any questions. The police aren't always right. Would anyone be happy if anyone involved got away free? Would anyone care if an innocent man was convicted?

I don't know how much involvement he had and that's why I want clarification. It seems odd that the guy who did it, would call the police tip line to tell them he had been there.

The hostile interview with the cop was because he wasn’t going to just roll over for them. It disturbs me to see how angry that cop got when he couldn't get a confession from him.
There's a trial going on of the one accused.

No one wants anyone innocent convicted and no one wasn't anyone who may have been involved to not be punished and you know that.

The thing is most of us think he's guilty and that he did it alone. It can't be helped that you don't.

There is a jury here to decide the facts, and it's at trial now. No one else was arrested and they are trying the case not running an investigation from the courtroom at the moment right? A man named Richard Allen is on trial for the murder of these girls with all due respect.
 
ETA: whoever killed those defenseless young girls was in control. Almost every adult in the area was better equipped than they were. So why is that a thing at all?

All I want is ALL of the people involved in this to be punished. I'm not just going to sit back and not have any questions. The police aren't always right. Would anyone be happy if anyone involved got away free? Would anyone care if an innocent man was convicted?

I don't know how much involvement he had and that's why I want clarification. It seems odd that the guy who did it, would call the police tip line to tell them he had been there.

The hostile interview with the cop was because he wasn’t going to just roll over for them. It disturbs me to see how angry that cop got when he couldn't get a confession from him.
You saw Holeman on the video? I don't think any of us have.

And he was able to arrest him without a confession at all and so he surely didn't need one. I don't see anything unusual about giving it one last major try before arresting him.

And from what I heard, RA yelled and swore back just as strongly.

We've been through why he called and now we know his wife told him to or so it was said and he also NEVER told HER he was on the bridge, just the trails. He was seen and he knew it. This has been discussed many a time.

You can have all the questions you like, doesn't change anything and for the record, so can the jury ask what they want for the most part. I'm sure they are looked at first and such as that's how it works but they can. Too bad you aren't on the jury, you could ask.
 
There's a trial going on of the one accused.

No one wants anyone innocent convicted and no one wasn't anyone who may have been involved to not be punished and you know that.

The thing is most of us think he's guilty and that he did it alone. It can't be helped that you don't.

There is a jury here to decide the facts, and it's at trial now. No one else was arrested and they are trying the case not running an investigation from the courtroom at the moment right? A man named Richard Allen is on trial for the murder of these girls with all due respect.

I think most of you are ignoring some obvious flaws in the case against him. The shouting at him by the cop makes me feel they were hell bent on convicting him. They needed a confession, but he made them do it the hard way, so they cut corners.
 
His wife told him to call them and tell them. He does what she says. He's not innocent based on the fact he knows things only the killer knows. The white van arriving for instance that he told Wala about, the way they were killed, and telling the cops he had never lent his gun out.
Yes and he purposely omitted from his wife that he was on the bridge.
 
I've never seen this before. I found while looking for information on RA's Franks memo. So I'll post it here and see what you guys think:

 
I dont really follow what the point is that you are making. I don't know how you could even know what tips had been called in on anybody either so it is irrelevant anyway. RA is charged with the murders now and in a couple of weeks we will have a verdict. Anything else is a waste of time.
Yes this case will for most intents and purposes be over. It's going to be really strange. Most of the big national interest ones will be. At least here and the ones some are in. Not that others dont' matter, I don't mean that at all, but the ones that have probably taken a lot of time just due to the things in them. Daybell, Delphi. For me back a time was Stauch. I mean Lori still has more coming up but that's going to be some time for sure. I guess there is Kohberger although I wouldn' say that's garnering a lot of interest here so far probably because not a lot of news on it etc. Soto for me is new and big out there. We have LISK yet I guess, that's big. And by big again I don't mean others are less, they just have a ton of info, some of them of course more than one murder and info is released at times so there are things to talk about.

It dawned on me a few days ago or a week? That this WILL be over and it will be very strange... Of course there will be appeals but I think all now how I mean it. Trial and verdict. Over.

And I agree. My interest is in this trial and I don't waver on his guilt and haven't for a long time.

He is being tried and there is a jury and they are the fact finders and have the right to issue the verdict in this case and they also are hearing all that we are not. And able to ask any pertinent question if they have such.
 

What Google searches from Richard Allen reveal​

As the prosecution rested its case against Delphi murders suspect Richard Allen, prosecutors submitted one final exhibit to the court.

The state had asked the court to admit Allen’s Google search history into evidence. The defense objected and Special Judge Fran Gull took it under advisement. On Thursday, she allowed the prosecution to submit the evidence to the jury.

FOX59/CBS4 reporter Max Lewis noted that the searches weren’t read aloud in court and witnesses offered no testimony about them.

The searches are from Allen’s Gmail account and were done on one of his devices.

On Oct. 2, 2022, less than two weeks before he was initially questioned in the case, Allen searched for the “65+ best kidnapping and hostage movies ever made.” Other searches from the same day included “man held hostage by teen” and “movie about a man being held against his will.”

On Oct. 17, 2022, he searched ABC News for an article about the Delphi murders. That would have been four days after investigators initially questioned him about the case.

On May 27, 2020, he searched for a story about rebuilding the Monon High Bridge. In May 2021, he searched for shooting ranges.

Allen also searched multiple times about the Delphi case, according to the records. On Aug. 4 and Aug. 5, 2022, he did five searches for “Delphi murders update.” That’s just a couple months before he found himself at the center of the case.

Between January 2022 and April 2022, Allen did a general search for “Delphi” 11 times. Also in April 2022, he searched “should I die now?”
It appeared Allen had an interest in disturbing movies. On April 27, 2022, he searched for “insidious” and “horrifying” things to watch. In another search from June 2023, he looked for the “most f***** up thing to watch on Netflix,” according to the analysis.
The searches weren't read aloud and no witnesses testified about them. So how do reporters know what was searched for? Are they allowed to look at the evidence and exhibits after or what? Kind of cryptic in that sense how they are getting the info... WAs it put up on a screen for all in the courtroom but nothing said or read aloud? And they scribbled as fast as they could?

Very intresting news though... Can't say I'm surprised either re RA's interests, etc...
 

Delphi murders: Jurors react to video of Richard Allen in custody​

Video of Richard Allen during his time at Westville Correctional Facility left some jurors “aghast” and one defense attorney “staring in horror.”
Wow some of the news reports. No bias or sensationalism here. So they know how the juror felt, or actually SOME and can interpret I guess by expression. Sounds pretty subjective to me.

Arguably all the D attorneys should have seen it prior but perhaps the woman hadn't but there too, I give it a grain of salt as they are the ones that want the impact on the jurors... Never been any acting in courtroom by any attorney anywhere has there...? LOL. I"m responding to the news is all and not to anyone or anything else. This is one I am going to skip just due to the first words and such, I don't think it's one for me lol.
 
I say this delicately because I'm a prude. That's just all there is to it.

I read somewhere there are videos of RA masturbating while Wala was there. If thats the case, it's not a good look for anyone involved. I can't remember where I read it.

Also, with his self proclamation that he's a sex addict I'm surprised we didn't hear of porn searches. I'm assuming whatever they searched had no child porn on it, or we would definitely know by now.
Well I mentioned it fleetingly and wasn't that about when you asked me how Tom knew things others don't? He doesn't, they are all hearing the same things. I GUESSED that's what was being played as I'd just heard RA had done this in his cell from testimony a day or so prior. It doesn't sound like it was what was played here though...

As far as the searches, these searches are more recent ones. His phone at the time of the murders was never found. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if he had a burner phone either. Regardless, he had five years to scrub a lot of things. And I'd also say that in no way was he sharing all his activities, web sites or probems with his wife like sex addiction. Oh she may have known of it, hard to say, but not the extent imo or total truth, probably ever.

There is a LOT in the LE interviews that was redacted. Not lost or covered over, but redacted that Gull didn't allow and said it didn't relate to the murders. My guess is it is a heck of a lot of family things, issues, marital things, more...

There are some real holes here, and I don't mean it in a way of a lack, I mean things get argued we and the jury never hear prior to trial about what can come in, what can't, etc. and this one IF a reporter did hear, it was under gag order or if anyone did. I wanted to hear the wife's and daughter's interviews. Nope. Well not that "we" would be able to hear them but they would have been covered by media and better yet (lol) by Tom. Not sure if it was a choice by the P or not allowed in, etc. It's always guesswork what is kept out usually and why...

Can you tell me will there be rebuttal here, in an IN court?

I can't recall what case but not all that long ago, in the past year anyhow, maybe less, I was surprised to see a trial where they didn't do that or have that. I'm not talking closing statements but the case and testimony and the trial.

Back to thing about him naked, masturbating or whatever with his unit, just recall Tom talking about the uhm I'm going to say unit, I forget what word he finally settled on and wish I could recall the witness he was covering and it may well have been Wala, but I won't swear to that... That's a word I often use lol to be delicate and not graphic.

Nothing mentioned that the media could see in what played sounds related to this... Of course media apparently didn't report what Tom said either and you hadn't heard it it seemed at the time, so maybe they avoid talking it all together being traditional media? What I mean is maybe it was played but they just didn't touch on those...?

It's in an article above the things that were seen I read tonight... Apparently some media could see so I guess Gull didn't have the screen turned around quite far enough to block the view of a few...

I've not gotten to Tom yet tonight at all, still catching up here and I'll fast be behind with him as full week ahead.

Worked til past nine back at 8:30 tomorrow, hate those back to backs, have said that plenty I know. So not a lot of time or sleep tonight in between but DST kicks in so I 'gain" an hour but that jus means I'll likely be stupid and up later instead of gaining more sleep LOL.
 
It really bothers me that the audio is muted during his time with guards. I'd like to know what was said to him.
We'd all like to see and know a lot of things but much of that is going to have to come later. The defense has seen it, well apparently at least one hadn't even seen these videos perhaps, the P has access, etc.

Things can't be sealed forever.

Think on this though. The jury saw exactly IF they were doing their jobs the correct was as to handling him, washing him, etc. I'm assuming there was a reason no audio was allowed and if she said it, did anyone report it, or did she not give the reason?

I do get that bothering you, but where I'm bothered too is except apparently some media being able to see some I assume by accident, no one in the courtroom saw it and so we can't even know with accuracy nor can the families, etc. because only the jury saw it so no reporting that isn't just sensational with the reactions allegedly.

Becky Patty was right. This is highly unfair to them and to the girls and no respect was given to them and who saw all those images. And as I said earlier, this is a trial, a PUBLIC TRIAL.

And then what do we get, the shock, the awe, the aghast some claim some jurors were showing and one D attorney. This is the reporting we get... Instead of a true and accurate account of what was seen in these videos.

And I know Tom isn't going to have it as he wouldn't have been able to see it. THe extra public is in the very back. Media is closer. However, if he did attend all day, I'll at least get his true read on the expressions, etc... Although not sure how much I will get to tonight, haven't headed there yet.
 
We'd all like to see and know a lot of things but much of that is going to have to come later. The defense has seen it, well apparently at least one hadn't even seen these videos perhaps, the P has access, etc.

Things can't be sealed forever.

Think on this though. The jury saw exactly IF they were doing their jobs the correct was as to handling him, washing him, etc. I'm assuming there was a reason no audio was allowed and if she said it, did anyone report it, or did she not give the reason?

I do get that bothering you, but where I'm bothered too is except apparently some media being able to see some I assume by accident, no one in the courtroom saw it and so we can't even know with accuracy nor can the families, etc. because only the jury saw it so no reporting that isn't just sensational with the reactions allegedly.

Becky Patty was right. This is highly unfair to them and to the girls and no respect was given to them and who saw all those images. And as I said earlier, this is a trial, a PUBLIC TRIAL.

And then what do we get, the shock, the awe, the aghast some claim some jurors were showing and one D attorney. This is the reporting we get... Instead of a true and accurate account of what was seen in these videos.

And I know Tom isn't going to have it as he wouldn't have been able to see it. THe extra public is in the very back. Media is closer. However, if he did attend all day, I'll at least get his true read on the expressions, etc... Although not sure how much I will get to tonight, haven't headed there yet.

There should be a transcript at least. The defense claims the guards were taunting him during his stay. Were they?
 
While looking around, I found this article with the quote from it bolded below.


"The affidavit does not make any reference to any other participants in the girls’ killings, despite Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland recently saying in court that he had “good reason to believe that Richard Allen is not the only actor in this heinous crime.'"

So, how'd they rule out someone else, or is this just more proof of a poor investigation or laziness on their part?
 
That's an interesting point. I have a friend into horror movies, but she's not a risk to society.

No child porn is also interesting. If he had communicated with KK would they have been allowed to do so?

His interests in searches is a bit odd given the crime he's accused of. I don't know what to think really, but it's not good.
Some of what he was looking for though were teens having HIM held hostage and uhm whatever...

The child porn if any, was likely gone years ago. and if he looks/looked for such still five years later when he had rid of all he could I'm sure, bet money would be on a burner phone... Imo, I get the sense when they were home together, RA was fairly locked down with KA. I mean she worked, he worked but when together... She was working the day of the murders and I mean look what he got up to when she's not around.

What do you mean by your second sentence? You mean communicate from prison to prison or now jail to prison? LIke CB and Happy FAce did?
It isn't clear what you mean? Who is they, RA and KK and what do you mean allowed to communicate?

For me, ,this guy is every thing the instincts said he was, and he pretty much has said it himself.

You now, and I know you always can go there, but you know I trust most juries but it doesn't mean there can't be one bad one or one that just isn't seeing things... But generally if a good and responsible one, they will dial down to the key things... They will toss all things around, IF all feel relevant, weed through that, and with some things, one side said this, one that, etc., etc. It's going to come down to things like the voice, that is going to BE BIG. If I had a way of bringing forward the one I saw and finding it, I would. Harshman was it, SAIID it. I'm not sure why they didn't do an actual analyst and comparison but the jury I'd think can do the comparisons themselves with a LOT. By the way here is ANOTHER reason it may be better for RA there was no audio played... Have you thought of that? This whole trial has US not hearing his voice, the recordings, the interviews, etc. but the jury has...

The van is going to be big. The bullet of course. I'd like to also point out regardless of where he claims he must have lost one, he said to Holeman he did not have a gun with him the day on the trails. It is NOT what he said to Dr. Wala...

And a few other things. Not telling his wife he was on the bridge. A smattering of additional smaller things.

Forgetting some other ones, but they will if they do as most tdo, clear away all the b.s. and look at what's there.

of course defense isn't done yet, so not saying we know all they will put up but talking on what has been seen so far.

And they are going to come in guilty, short of one rogue juror. Imo. And I have no reason to think they have such. Most whose opinions I'd trust more than some out there in news and talking heads and such, feel they picked a solid jury. I hope they are right. And I always think MOST are. And no I'm not going to go down any side road with ya lol with Casey or OJ. Been there plenty.

Probably too long for ya and won't read.

But your last sentence too, are you saying it would seem it's pretty damning to RA... Is that what you mean?
 
I wonder, when convicted and the effort and I think almost strong arming him into pleading innocent when he wanted to confess, sorry but I do by his attys., wife, mom, maybe strong arming is the wrong word will he then again confess and come clean when there's no point any longer... Most never do, but I wonder with him.
 
Some of what he was looking for though were teens having HIM held hostage and uhm whatever...

The child porn if any, was likely gone years ago. and if he looks/looked for such still five years later when he had rid of all he could I'm sure, bet money would be on a burner phone... Imo, I get the sense when they were home together, RA was fairly locked down with KA. I mean she worked, he worked but when together... She was working the day of the murders and I mean look what he got up to when she's not around.

What do you mean by your second sentence? You mean communicate from prison to prison or now jail to prison? LIke CB and Happy FAce did?
It isn't clear what you mean? Who is they, RA and KK and what do you mean allowed to communicate?

For me, ,this guy is every thing the instincts said he was, and he pretty much has said it himself.

You now, and I know you always can go there, but you know I trust most juries but it doesn't mean there can't be one bad one or one that just isn't seeing things... But generally if a good and responsible one, they will dial down to the key things... They will toss all things around, IF all feel relevant, weed through that, and with some things, one side said this, one that, etc., etc. It's going to come down to things like the voice, that is going to BE BIG. If I had a way of bringing forward the one I saw and finding it, I would. Harshman was it, SAIID it. I'm not sure why they didn't do an actual analyst and comparison but the jury I'd think can do the comparisons themselves with a LOT. By the way here is ANOTHER reason it may be better for RA there was no audio played... Have you thought of that? This whole trial has US not hearing his voice, the recordings, the interviews, etc. but the jury has...

The van is going to be big. The bullet of course. I'd like to also point out regardless of where he claims he must have lost one, he said to Holeman he did not have a gun with him the day on the trails. It is NOT what he said to Dr. Wala...

And a few other things. Not telling his wife he was on the bridge. A smattering of additional smaller things.

Forgetting some other ones, but they will if they do as most tdo, clear away all the b.s. and look at what's there.

of course defense isn't done yet, so not saying we know all they will put up but talking on what has been seen so far.

And they are going to come in guilty, short of one rogue juror. Imo. And I have no reason to think they have such. Most whose opinions I'd trust more than some out there in news and talking heads and such, feel they picked a solid jury. I hope they are right. And I always think MOST are. And no I'm not going to go down any side road with ya lol with Casey or OJ. Been there plenty.

Probably too long for ya and won't read.

But your last sentence too, are you saying it would seem it's pretty damning to RA... Is that what you mean?

How long did he have the current computer? I've had some for over five years. Even if it is new. Child porn isn't an on and off type psychological disorder. It's an addiction.

Nobody thinks they'll be caught and therefore do little to cover things up until they're looked at. IIRC, KK tried deleting stuff from his computers and phones when the heat was on.

In my last comment, I'm saying that it is awfully strange given the crime he's accused of. Yes, it's damning.
 
I wonder, when convicted and the effort and I think almost strong arming him into pleading innocent when he wanted to confess, sorry but I do by his attys., wife, mom, maybe strong arming is the wrong word will he then again confess and come clean when there's no point any longer... Most never do, but I wonder with him.

He's confessed 61 times, allegedly.
 
You and I have differences with whether or not the Franks memo was legal. More than a few lawyers feel that lies on it let the cops get it. What those lies are I can't remember. I do remember a search would never have been granted without them, according to some lawyers.

This whole thing seems to be making a story that makes him look guilty. It's disturbing from what happened at the murders, to what's happening now.
I don't mean any offense but it's hard following these last few, maybe you re tired. Lies in the Frank's memo? And let what cops get it? And I've never said the Frank's memo wasn't "legal", I mean they filed it and more and weren't arrested. Maybe you mean had facts, was legit argument or something but it is unclear as that isn't what you said.

It sounds like you are talking of lies in it and my guess is that's certainly not what you meant.

Then you mention the search warrant so my guess is you did not mean Frank's memo at all but whether the search or warrant was legal which I is what the FM was about or some of it because their filings were well, all over the place...

Yes, it's very clear you feel that way per your last sentence, and always has been. And I don't like some of the mishaps or missteps in this case. You have a leaning that way quite a bit though in cases, and the rest of us though aren't dumb either and we (well not speaking for all) but many see it opposite. You also admit yourself you aren't up on all of it all of the time. I'm not caught up with trials but am with the overall news here, etc. and then I go to Tom (I know all know this and I am ad nauseum) but I don't go for his OPINION at all as it isn't what he does. Oh he will give on on occasion but he is only providing as best he can all questions and answers, observations, objections and rulings, as best he can and that let's ME decide based on a far fuller picture of the trial.

There are 12 people that have to agree, and that's our system. It is at trial.

Yeah he tried to come across really good in that last interview of being framed and innocent and I didn't fall for a bit of it. There were so many tells and changes....

Can I also ask you do you also know now that no recording of RA in an LE interview went missing?

Back to your FM remark, I do think you are talking the search warrant and no, we do not agree. Likely never will. And that's okay.

It doesn't help that reporting is not covering all, but I'll give them the fact they have other news, Gull has made it hard and to get out what Tom is doing where he only does ONE case (not a Grizzly who tries to cover all under the sun) and he can't even catch it all.

And as I think most can see lately, I am not an always Gull fan. Becky Patty was so right on and I never even thought of that until I heard her say it and saw further coverage and how the D thanked Gull for giving RA some dignity, etc... OMG.

Also as far as the O thing or any third party defense she left that door open if you recall or followed, if they can bring the kind of proof that the law requires.

And more is coming, I'm sure by this D and supposedly KK.

We are not going to agree, I know that, and you know that.

I can see where you are coming from though. But there's not some giant conspiracy involving tens and tens of people. You said earlier that you said you didn't necessarilyt hing all but some is all it would take... I don't think I responded to that...

Okay but then of the ones in on it or however many you do think, the others have some pretty damning stuff and would have had to be part OR...

It''s just too much and would take so many and so much. If it wsn't late and I'm an idiot and tired and should be in bed, I'd list all I can think of who would have to be in on it, never give in, keep the silence, HE77 they'd all have to have meetings from witnesses, to Weber, to LE from many agencies, to the prosecutors, to you name it....

You know when I started here and I never understood why, you implied I was a conspiracy theorist more than once and I never gave one reason to think that which made me wonder about a few things actually as far as trusting it here after JT and such....

But now I am only going to say to you what you did to me, I don't believe in these kinds of huge conspiracies, but you do.

Did LE mess up. Surely they did at times. It doesn't mean he isn't guilty. And I mean I they wanted to frame someone, wouldn't KK or RL (and I am NOT going down the RL road lol) have been a lot easier than some dude NO ONE even knew about... Not any of us.... He DID IT.

Emphasis not at you, on I am that sure, and that's my opinion.

Anywho.... This is going to be over in a couple of weeks. At most. Of course there will be appeals, other b.s., news until they lose interest, etc...

Not an argument as I think shows. And give me some credit here too, I DO SEE why you think as you do but I'm not as positive you see why some of the rest of us don't.

And I think I may be the only one who heard that voice thing because even though I linked it long ago, no one else mentions it. DEAD ON. I already had a leaning but that was one of many CLINCHERS. You and I discussed how many voices over the years and how "maybe" and can't rule out and such. This wasn't that, it was BG's VOICE, it was RA's voice.

yeah maybe he doesn't want audio for many a reason....

And I'lll say one more thing, anyone who knows him well, mom, wife, daughter, KNOWS that's his voice.

Enough from me.

And of course, you have your own opinion. And again you aren't going to change mine or me yours. Short of a miracle.

And all you mention, some of what you've always mentioned, and I have too, like the voice, I see and get your points and have debated back more than once, I do get it but I don't see it the same way.

Tonight you mentioned why he'd go voluntarily to talk to LE, that one's been covered many a time, back and forth, oodles of times. We also know now she told him to go in as he'd simply told her he'd been at the trails (for obvious reasons and boy do I want to hear her interview, maybe never will), and then she found out he was on the bridge and became very upset he'd never told her that part.

There is just so much. For me anyhow. Maybe not for you. And now I'm just going on too long and tired but I'll end with I can see where you're coming from but I've seen and found enough, plenty, and again the voice is a dead on match.

He was worried for a reason. For many reasons.

And the ones closst to him know that voice. Of course we've never heard them say that and they maybe never have but they know. Maybe convinced self it wasn't him, he was never on the bridge and he is lying to her in those days...

I hate saying this but said a bit about it yesterday but I think his mom and mother need for all to see him as innocent and be innocent more than he does. I think we have an attempt at covering an not perfect life and presenting a front.

Okay, I could still go on and am getting longwinded and get that I am somewhat sidetracking so going to end there. SHoudl go to bed but going to do a bit of time, maybe finiish reading here, I think I was near the end, or some cooking, Canadian mom, something...

It's going to be one of my usual where some nights are going to be less than 3 hours of sleep, for if I am smart... Not looking forward to this time change. Do you in NY change, or change now too? Or don't do it?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,470
Members
964
Latest member
ztw1990
Back
Top Bottom