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 just saw this, I may have seen it before, can't recall. He actually thinks this would have been helpful for Rick. I don't. I think it would have been the opposite. Poor man was exhausted, I mean he had a big day.

That is also if KA was even telling the truth. I for one wouldn't believe a word out of her mouth.

It's just a "short".



Poor guys didn't dare put Mrs. Allen on the stand.

Baldwin, poor old sod, looks and sounds worn out.
 
So per Scott, it would seem the D has to do one last effort in front of the trial court before appealing. He thinks Gull will promptly deny it. I agree. It is also a joke imo, all of it, nothing of substance is there.

 
O/T. So in Scott's dumb criminals of the day, here we go again, why do idiots get mad over fast food and start shooting. This time it was over cold french fries at the drive thru at Wendy's. Guy (customer) pulled out a gun and shot if I have it right. He and friends went inside. Female clerk not to be outdone, was packing and she pulled out a gun and shot. More shooting and clerk got shot in BUTT by someone. Etc. Etc. Both hauled off to jail. Clerk was on probation and was a felon and not to have firearm. Etc.

Sheesh. I'm not happy over cold fries. Earlier I got very upset over someone insulting enchiladas but I never start shooting... I'm still free too. Seems like a good plan to me, don't shoot over food... Especially fast food... Scott never has any shortage of dumb criminals in this country, I think at times they have time picking just one incident/person...
 
O/T. So in Scott's dumb criminals of the day, here we go again, why do idiots get mad over fast food and start shooting. This time it was over cold french fries at the drive thru at Wendy's. Guy (customer) pulled out a gun and shot if I have it right. He and friends went inside. Female clerk not to be outdone, was packing and she pulled out a gun and shot. More shooting and clerk got shot in BUTT by someone. Etc. Etc. Both hauled off to jail. Clerk was on probation and was a felon and not to have firearm. Etc.

Sheesh. I'm not happy over cold fries. Earlier I got very upset over someone insulting enchiladas but I never start shooting... I'm still free too. Seems like a good plan to me, don't shoot over food... Especially fast food... Scott never has any shortage of dumb criminals in this country, I think at times they have time picking just one incident/person...
LOL. I just finished watching this too. Yep that server who returned fire and ended up shot in the butt was a felon herself and shouldn't even have been packing a gun anyway but it may have saved her life though.

Did you notice in the RA segment, Scott revealed that he was kept under a pseudonym in jail, for protection, i guess. So finally, that explains the alias of Craig Ross Renfrew on his details.
 
Last edited:
LOL. I just finished watching this too. Yep that server who returned fire and ended up shot in the butt was a felon herself and shouldn't even have been packing a gun anyway but it may have saved her life though.

Did you notice in the RA segment, Scott revealed that he was kept under a pseudonym in jail, for protection, i guess. So that explains the alias of Craig Ross Renfrew on his details.
Yeah, I heard that the other day but never thought to mention it.

You know another thing in the D filing that they kind of fuzzed up was the atty, KA hired told KA the night before RA was going to be charged with murder the next day, He knew everything, they were informing him. Yet then the D says they went ahead even though they knew he was represented and did the safekeeping order. Well hey the atty knew they were going to charge him etc. that day so it isn't like anyone needed to inform him, he KNEW. No secret to him,

They are twisting that too.

Personally I don't think we've ever heard from that atty as he didn't see anything wrong in anything and he did make contact, etc. was told he was under an alias, was allowed to meet with RA, etc. It is THIS D trying to use that atty to make these allegations now. It is NOT that atty doing so.
 
Yeah, I heard that the other day but never thought to mention it.

You know another thing in the D filing that they kind of fuzzed up was the atty, KA hired told KA the night before RA was going to be charged with murder the next day, He knew everything, they were informing him. Yet then the D says they went ahead even though they knew he was represented and did the safekeeping order. Well hey the atty knew they were going to charge him etc. that day so it isn't like anyone needed to inform him, he KNEW. No secret to him,

They are twisting that too.

Personally I don't think we've ever heard from that atty as he didn't see anything wrong in anything and he did make contact, etc. was told he was under an alias, was allowed to meet with RA, etc. It is THIS D trying to use that atty to make these allegations now. It is NOT that atty doing so.
So that also explains why he handed his keys and belonging to KA beforehand and why in the interview he ends up saying arrest me.

So was the story about going to pick up the car just a load of bull too?

And we recently learned that McLeland watched the interview and arrest remotely.

Have to say I am impressed with how LE handled it. With someone like RA, he could have flipped at any time.
 
So that also explains why he handed his keys and belonging to KA beforehand and why in the interview he ends up saying arrest me.

So was the story about going to pick up the car just a load of bull too?

And we recently learned that McLeland watched the interview and arrest remotely.

Have to say I am impressed with how LE handled it. With someone like RA, he could have flipped at any time.
Hmmm, so you are thinking KA went and hired this atty while RA was being interviewed and the atty told her before she went back in that he would be arrested for murder? I didn't take it like that I guess... I figured RA was arrested and this attorney she had hired earlier did his job after KA told him he had been arrested, and he found out the charges were going to be murder the next day so he couldn't get him out on bond that night as KA probably had asked him to try to do...??

I did not know NM watched remotely.

I have no complaints about how they did this, I think they executed all perfectly and well within allowed practice.

No idea if the car thing was legit or not, I do believe or imagine the Allens did want it back if possible... I'm sure they needed it or needed money and anything they could get...
 
Hmmm, so you are thinking KA went and hired this atty while RA was being interviewed and the atty told her before she went back in that he would be arrested for murder? I didn't take it like that I guess... I figured RA was arrested and this attorney she had hired earlier did his job after KA told him he had been arrested, and he found out the charges were going to be murder the next day so he couldn't get him out on bond that night as KA probably had asked him to try to do...??

I did not know NM watched remotely.

I have no complaints about how they did this, I think they executed all perfectly and well within allowed practice.

No idea if the car thing was legit or not, I do believe or imagine the Allens did want it back if possible... I'm sure they needed it or needed money and anything they could get...
Yeah NM shared that in the interview he did.
 
Yeah I need to get back to that. I hadn't finished even NM yet. I was going to go back but I did stop to get Tom's in so I knew what had been filed and what was being claimed, then I never got back to MS. Pretty sure I still have it up on a tab though for when I get a moment. Who is Luttrull, is that a P atty. I think? I forget...
 
I'm watching Tom at Taco Bell lol. He is a Taco Bell fanatic and is doing a video there and ordering food lol. Trying a bunch of new things so far...
 
Yeah I need to get back to that. I hadn't finished even NM yet. I was going to go back but I did stop to get Tom's in so I knew what had been filed and what was being claimed, then I never got back to MS. Pretty sure I still have it up on a tab though for when I get a moment. Who is Luttrull, is that a P atty. I think? I forget...
Yes he was assisting Mcleland and Diener.
 
Prosecutor says inmate who defense claims confessed to Delphi murders failed polygraph
Last month, WSBT 22 reported the lawyers for convicted murderer Richard Allen claimed another man had confessed to the killings of Abby Williams and Libby German.

The Carrol County Prosecutor says that inmate failed a polygraph test when investigators pushed further into the confession.
 

Delphi murders: State’s filing includes photos of Libby German’s iPhone 6s seen only in court​

A motion from Richard Allen’s defense team prompted a response from the prosecution—and led to the release of crime scene photos never before seen outside of court.

Last month, Allen’s defense team filed a “Motion to Correct Errors” maintaining their client’s conviction should be vacated. The defense cited a purported confession from another man and the disputed timeline of a passing van that proved key to the case.

Another factor brought up by Allen’s attorneys: expert testimony from a defense witness who said activity logged from Libby German’s iPhone 6s showed someone had inserted and removed headphones from the auxiliary jack.

The logged activity happened between 5:44 p.m. to 10:32 p.m. on Feb. 13, 2017—the day the girls were killed. The testimony came from Stacy Eldridge, a digital forensics expert who took the stand for the defense.

In response, Sgt. Chris Cecil, an Indiana State Police phone expert who testified for the state, said it was possible water or dirt may have been responsible for the logged activity. Cecil told the court he had performed a Google search during a court break before offering his opinion.

In his response to the defense’s motion, Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland cast doubt on Eldridge’s findings, saying she didn’t file a report, log or other information to support her testimony. McLeland also noted the bulk of her expertise was in computer and network forensics—not cellphone forensics.

McLeland wrote that investigators didn’t find any headphones at the murder scene.

He also found it “unlikely” that someone returned to the crime scene after 2:32 p.m.—the moment the phone stopped moving—removed the phone from underneath Abby Williams’ body (where the phone was later found), plugged in headphones, kept them plugged in for five hours and then placed the phone back under Abby’s body—all without logging any movement.

McLeland wrote that Eldridge didn’t examine the phone herself and had no way of determining whether or not the phone sustained any water damage.

In support of his response, McLeland included multiple exhibits. Three of them—State Exhibits 9, 10 and 11—show Libby German’s iPhone 6s at the crime scene. The photos were shown at trial, but only court observers and the jury were able to see them.

The photos appear to show the phone’s screen covered with droplets of moisture as the phone sat among sticks, leaves and, presumably, dirt.

The phone was absolutely central to the Delphi murders case. Libby German used it to record a 43-second video showing the girls’ encounter with “Bridge Guy.” Activity data also showed the phone stopped moving at 2:32 p.m. on Feb. 13, 2017, which the state believes marked the moment the girls were killed.

Cecil did see photos of the phone showing the condition in which it was found. He based his conclusion, in part, on those photos along with how long the iPhone was outside and his “knowledge and experience as a forensic phone examiner,” McLeland wrote.

The prosecutor said the defense could have called a witness to rebut Cecil’s testimony about the impact dirt and water could have on the phone. However, the defense didn’t call such a witness, he said.

McLeland noted that none of it constituted new information that would overturn the result of Allen’s trial. In fact, the information came from discovery materials and he believes it should have been brought up during the trial to challenge Cecil’s testimony.

As such, the prosecutor said the phone evidence–and the other issues raised by the defense–didn’t constitute a basis for a “Motion to Correct Errors” and asked the court to reject the defense’s motion without a hearing.

1738817213041.png
 
I heard about his earlier but never got around to coming in here about it, and some oe if was on a long YT video by Gray Hughes and I didn't see linking that, though the respone would be better.

The P outdoes tD with every single response yet so many out there get so excited every time the D files something or "claims" something and it always comes back to where the response blows them out of the water or even, imo, shows the D lied or omitted things. It has happened so many times I have lost count and nothing they file phases me any longer. , if it ever did. So much off their sh*t can be seen through easily but then I guess too many make money of running with it out there, at least until it once again is shot down.

I see this going nowhere, the D motion but I guess we will see Also sorry to say NM is a far better attorney than they are. And it shows itself repeatedly. It's been shown repeatedly in filings and in trial. I thin I said after the D filed this one some of these very things and one was that they had the chance too come back on the phone thing at trial and they failed to do so. That's on them. So the phone did show moisture per the pics, and I figured that as well, It was WINTER there and under Abby, perhaps even got wet with the creek.

I don't know if the D will ever give up but they should, should have a long time ago and let new attys come on. And I think such has been shown countless times now.

All jmo but it is my actual opinion.
 
So the inmate who said RL confessed to him was lying. And the phone could not have had headphones plugged in and removed because it showed no movement from where it lay under Abby. Plus it showed moisture visibly.

I cannot see any reason that an appeal on these grounds will go anywhere.
 
So the inmate who said RL confessed to him was lying. And the phone could not have had headphones plugged in and removed because it showed no movement from where it lay under Abby. Plus it showed moisture visibly.

I cannot see any reason that an appeal on these grounds will go anywhere.
I don't either and every single thing throughout the D tries to claim gets debunked or they omit info and that isn't "good lawyering" and in fact they look like buffoons or even corrupt when one finds out for instance, this inmate failed a polygraph but they sure never mentioned that did they when they tried to "wow" the public with this sensational fact someone else confessed. SMDH.
 
Tom does a show any time something is filed, although never immediately. He has his scheduled on the State's recent response now for tomorrow. Here is the link.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,059
Messages
249,727
Members
996
Latest member
scngagirl
Back
Top Bottom