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:
Of course, I respect the juries decision. I don't respect Judge Gull's hamstringing the defense.
Okay then. From what I saw she decided with the D so many times during trial I thought I overboard but if you mean no third party defense that was well explained and a appeals court will confirm or deny. They did not have enough to allow one. They also could have brought proof during trial and did not.

Anyhow, I was seriously asking and I understand your opinion.

For me, they made the right decision. And would have even if such smoke had been blown or allowed to be. That's jmo of course.

Even with that, when it is all stripped away, it is there. Again imo.

Anyhow, I'm sure yes appeals will go on.

I also admire there was not a blip from this jury. No one dropped out other than an alternate early on. Despite the sequestering, etc.

I'm really just taking in that this is over and catching up and realizing it.
 
Do you expect them to appeal her not allowing a third party defence?

What are posters' experience of defendants using a third party ( or so called SODDI) defence?

Isn't that what got O.J. off ?
Well it was pretty clear what the higher courts have said about such. There needs to be some very solid evidence and proof. It's one thing to say someone else surely could have done it or had the opportunity versus a full third party defense and naming the person/people. I never knew that until this case and I agree with it.

That's my little opinion anyhow.

As it is, they got the name,es out there and everything else with absolutely nothing to back it up. Not to the jury but to the public and of course for a reason...

Imo they went a little too wild with such, and imo to cover their failures and RA's confessions, they needed a big splash.

I will always see it that way.

But again, that's jmo.
 
This is from Indystar and discusses appeal routes.


Is Odinism part of the picture?​

Allen was convicted of two counts of murder and two counts of murder while kidnapping Abigail "Abby" Williams and Liberty "Libby" German. For Allen's supporters, he was convicted not because of the evidence that jurors saw but because of what they did not see.

Allen will most certainly appeal and when he does, Odinism and Gull's decision to not allow his defense team to present to jurors evidence pointing to an occult sacrifice will likely be a key part of it, legal experts say.

Allen's defense team aggressively pushed their theory that Odinists, members of a pagan Norse religion hijacked by white nationalists, killed the girls during a sacrificial ritual in the woods. They put together an explosive 136-page memorandum laying out what they believe to be compelling evidence pointing to Odinism. They argued that sticks and branches were arranged on the girls' bodies and a letter was painted on a tree using Libby's blood to resemble Odinist runes and symbols.

After the verdict: Some hike the Monon High Bridge trail Monday to pay respects to Libby and Abby

They put forth names of purported Odinists who they say are viable suspects in the case, including a Logansport man whose son dated Abby and who, the defense alleged, posted cryptic images on social media resembling the crime scene. During a pretrial hearing in August, a former Indiana State Police detective who investigated the Odinism angle testified that Brad Holder's social media posts are "not a coincidence." At that same hearing, an expert called by the defense testified that the teens' deaths are "textbook" examples of a ritualistic murder.

But ultimately, none of these were enough to convince Gull that jurors needed to hear about Odinism. She ruled that presenting such evidence would only cause confusion and could potentially mislead the jury. In his appeal, Allen could resurrect the issue of judicial bias ― that Gull was not a neutral arbiter but a judge who has shown explicit favoritism of the prosecution.

"That basically is what the defense thought hamstrung them," said Jody Madeira, an Indiana University law professor who's been following the case. "They couldn't present the narrative they wanted. There were still gaps that they could not fill. I think that's going to be a central focus of their appeal."



View |11 Photos
As Delphi trial reaches verdict, people visit trail to honor the victims

As Delphi trial reaches verdict, people visit trail to honor the victims
As the testimonies began last month, Gull also ruled that jurors would not see the two widely circulated composite sketches that police released in 2017 and 2019, siding with Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland that the artistic renderings were based on witnesses who described a variety of facial features but noted they were not certain of their identifications. Defense attorneys argued that the sketches showing two different men, neither of which resemble Allen, are highly relevant.

"I think the most appealable issue is that his attorneys attempted to bring in the fact that there were other possible suspects in the case and Judge Gull refused to allow that," said Indianapolis defense attorney Jeffrey Mendes, who's been following the case.

The evidence against Richard Allen: Jury in Delphi murders deliberated for days

What other issues could be raised on appeal?​

The incriminating statements that Allen made while awaiting trial at Westville Correctional Facility ― and Gull's decision to allow them to be presented to jurors ― also could be raised on appeal, experts say.

The case against Allen relied partly on the dozens of statements he gave to prison officials, his therapist and in many phone calls to his family. Prosecutors presented some of those confessions, including one he made to Dr. Monica Wala, his therapist at Westville. According to Wala's notes of that session with Allen, he said he'd intended to rape the girls, but he was spooked by a van driving on a private driveway nearby.

That vehicle, according to testimony, belonged to Brad Weber, who lives near the trail and who told jurors he was coming home from work in his white van at around 2:30 p.m. on Feb. 13, 2017 ― a few minutes after the girls would have been forced off the trail and into the woods.

Dueling images of Richard Allen: One who claimed innocence, one who confessed

That van, McLeland reiterated to jurors during his closing argument, was a detail "only the killer would know."

Before Allen's trial, his defense attorneys tried to keep his statements from being presented to jurors, arguing they were made involuntarily and in the throes of a severe mental health crisis while in solitary confinement. But Gull decided to allow the statements to be presented to jurors, ruling that the conditions of Allen's pretrial detention "were not intended to force confessions" from him.



View |8 Photos
See courtroom sketches from the Delphi murders trial of Richard Allen

Courtroom sketch artist Li Buszka attended the murder trial of Richard Allen on Monday, Oct. 28, 2024. See how her work captured the trial.
Questions about whether those statements, many of which Allen made while receiving antipsychotic medication, should've been admitted into evidence will most likely be raised on appeal, said John Tompkins, an Indianapolis defense attorney who's been following the case.

Another issue that could be raised is Gull's decision to block a metallurgist from testifying, Tompkins said.

Dr. William Tobin's testimony was meant to challenge the state's findings that a bullet cartridge found 6 inches from Abby's feet had been cycled through Allen's Sig Sauer, Model P226, .40-caliber handgun. Prosecutors argued that while Tobin is a recognized expert in metallurgy, a field that studies metallic elements, he is "not a firearms expert, has had no training in firearms identification, and has never conducted firearms examination."

The burden of justice: Delphi murder case jurors will face unimaginable pressure, life-changing decision

That unspent round was the single piece of physical evidence connecting Allen to the crime scene, and jurors heard from an Indiana State Police firearms examiner whose analysis concluded that the cartridge was tied to Allen's gun.

"Once you let that forensic evidence in, not allowing the metallurgist to testify becomes an issue," Tompkins said.

How will the appeals process play out?​

Allen is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 20. He then has 30 days to file a notice to appeal his conviction and his sentence. His appellate attorneys and the state, which will be represented by the Attorney General's Office, will each file lengthy briefings laying out their arguments. And there will likely be a hearing before the Indiana Court of Appeals.

The possible outcomes, according to Mendes: The appeals court finds that there are no errors at the trial court level. Or it finds that there were errors, but they were not significant enough to impact the outcome of the trial. In both cases, Allen's conviction stands. Allen can then ask the Indiana Supreme Court to review the case.

Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland speaks during a press conference addressing updates regarding the investigation of the murders of Abby Williams and Libby German, Monday, Monday, Oct. 31, 2022, at Delphi United Methodist Church in Delphi, Ind.

Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland speaks during a press conference addressing updates regarding the investigation of the murders of Abby Williams and Libby German, Monday, … Show more
ALEX MARTIN/JOURNAL AND COURIER
Another possible outcome: The appeals court finds that there were several or significant errors in the case that Allen's conviction should be reversed. If this happens, the case will be sent back to Gull's court. McLeland will have to decide whether or not to try Allen again. This means McLeland, as the elected prosecutor, will have to ask Carroll County officials to spend more taxpayer dollars to put Allen back on trial. The Carroll County Council already appropriated a little over $4 million for the case.

There's another, albeit remote, possibility: A plea deal. If the case is sent back to Gull's court, the parties can decide to negotiate a plea deal to avoid yet another costly and controversial trial.

"That's a theoretical possibility," Tompkins said. But, he added: "This is a defendant whose defense was, 'I did not do this.' You don't, as a defense attorney, tell a client who is innocent to go in and plead anyway."

IndyStar reporters Sarah Nelson, Noe Padilla and Lafayette Journal &Courier reporter Ron Wilkins contributed to this story. Contact IndyStar reporter Kristine Phillips at (317) 444-3026 or at kphillips@indystar.com.
 
Well, I know my opinion. The O thing holdsd no weight and won't if you ask me despite a voluminous crazy filing.

If I were RA I'd go flat out at ineffective counsel, however, he is kind of up a creak there because they were pretty much deemd to be such, he was told and chose them anyhow.

As far as anything else, who knows but I don't see it if an honest court.

What tI see is no matter IF any error was made, it is all here and always has been.

So perhaps they will find an error ro two (or not) but say the same outcome would have resulted and I think it would have. The man did HIMSELF in and placed himself there is one of many key things. Just the start of them.

A jury would find the same even if they'd been given some bull flown O thing I'm because they dialed down to what mattered.

Of course that's jmo.

The families can't even catch a moment can they. Still, guaranteed they are glad this part is over.

I'm very certain a guilty man was convicted and is being sent off to prison. I know all are not but I think most are. The other buzz out there, etc. is from exactly what it was intended to do.

And if I was not already certain I was even more so after trial and watching real coverage of how some who attended came to that conclusion themselves, and more than one who wasn't there before attending the trial.

as a bit of a side note, I've heard more than a few out there say what I said back aways here. Maybe now he can legitimately confess and maybe shall choose to (but will his attys or his family let him even now...)

Just my two cents worth. Just my opinion. Right tor wrong, that's how I see it.
 
^^^^This.
As far as the third party defense, the case law and law was looked at pretty solidly and its understandable why it was denied, imo anyhow.

And I think an appeals court will back that up.

And he's kind of screwed himself on ineffective counsel claims.

The one place I'm not as sure is not even being able to mention the possibility of others. Not necessarily naming them but not so sure how strict that decision was. I mean they looked as if they were doing to call KK, did they choose not to or was that just an old witness list?

I personally think had they put a third party defense on they'd have been in a worse boat. Jmo. Going at the mistakes by LE and such to me was far more effective. It did not work because imo the facts are there but it was far better imom than a crazy o defense would have been. These were imo sane, rational, logical jurors and nothing could plaace and O there and remove RA, there just isn't anything that could have.

I guess it will work it's way through the system, or the appeals will. If he doesn't legit confess all proper and signed and witnessed. Part of me thinks he might. The other part thinks no way.

Anyhow, for now he is incarcerated for some time to come and I am as are the families of the girls I would think just fine with that as I'm convinced.

Of course we don't agree and not all do.

It's a difference in what we look at and watch too perhaps or how we line up the evidence.

Just how it is, we don't always all agree.

One last thing is I'd have struggled with a guilty verdict had I not been able to put together some things that just can't be ignored and again the voice is one of many clinchers but not the only one. I was already there but that show I watched the other night that turned some over actually during trial, wow did they put a lot of it far better than I can. I see it, I know it, but it's hard to word it.

Anyhow, and so, this one is over other than appeals of course. It's been a debated case no doubt. And emotional I'd say. A very tough one.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,424
Members
964
Latest member
ztw1990
Back
Top Bottom