LIBBY GERMAN & ABBY WILLIAMS: Indiana vs. Richard Allen for 2017 murder of two Delphi girls *TRIAL IN PROGRESS*

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:
Then why is it okay to have a hearing about them, but not about Gull?

:)
You lost me with this one. Do you mean the ISC? Or do you mean Gull has one about them but not about recusing herself?

My guess is you are questioning the ISC and their knowledge and right to intrude and if they should?
 
You lost me with this one. Do you mean the ISC? Or do you mean Gull has one about them but not about recusing herself?

My guess is you are questioning the ISC and their knowledge and right to intrude and if they should?
I'm questioning why it seems acceptable to say it's okay for Gull to schedule the "prosecution" motion for a contempt hearing against the Defense when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It also seems acceptable for Gull to ignore the motion by defense to recuse herself when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It seems to me to be picking sides vs "let's get this to trial and let a jury decide".
 
I'm questioning why it seems acceptable to say it's okay for Gull to schedule the "prosecution" motion for a contempt hearing against the Defense when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It also seems acceptable for Gull to ignore the motion by defense to recuse herself when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It seems to me to be picking sides vs "let's get this to trial and let a jury decide".
So you are not talking about the ISC but about the trial court?

Imo the iSC sent this with all parties in place and defendants restored "back home" so to speak and let it play out as it should have.

One thing I don't understand tot his day is why defense never filed for a SUBSTITUTION of judge. They also NEVER filed for a recusal through ALL of it until it went wrong for them and their own antics didn't just slide by. They COULD have went to hearing that day and I find it funny to this day they didn't. I think there's more to the "friend" in the office thing and that's EXACTLY what we are finding out and they KNEW it (D). They left with their tail between their legs and were even worried about TV reporters, etc. BECAUSE they knew what they really did re the leak, etc... Imo.

Why not go in there and fight and even erupt if they had to for all the world to see if Gull was so wrong. Why did never once they request a different judge for a year UNTIL they got themselves in a mess AND until their client confessed, etc. but actually EVEN THEN they didn't. She rules against them on the prison thing more than once, WHY NOT ask for recusal then and claim bias?

I've said it before and I will again, just the timing of ALL tells the real story.

I'm not being heated or emphatic with you, I hope you know that about me by now but at what is going on.

Do you trust the ISC? Seriously asking. It's your ISC.

If Gull screws up big time, it will be seen. Imo the ISC is letting it play out first at the trial court level which is where the D should have looked for remedy first. They didn't. They needed the diversion and big splash imo of the ISC filing. They couldn't even tell the ISC we have tried this remedy or that or went to hearing that day or ever tried motioning her, or asking for substitution or recusal!. They are either attorneys not boned up on the first avenues or more likely they wanted the splash, the public thinking oh look at them this means Gull is in trouble, etc., the diversion, and quite honestly probably needed the TIME it all took.

I'm waiting for them to file speedy trial AND see it through. Want to bet it doesn't happen and if it is filed, it isn't seen through?

I think the ISC knew full well what they were doing and a lot more about it than us. That's a compliment to your court by the way. :)
 
So you are not talking about the ISC but about the trial court?

Imo the iSC sent this with all parties in place and defendants restored "back home" so to speak and let it play out as it should have.

One thing I don't understand tot his day is why defense never filed for a SUBSTITUTION of judge. They also NEVER filed for a recusal through ALL of it until it went wrong for them and their own antics didn't just slide by. They COULD have went to hearing that day and I find it funny to this day they didn't. I think there's more to the "friend" in the office thing and that's EXACTLY what we are finding out and they KNEW it (D). They left with their tail between their legs and were even worried about TV reporters, etc. BECAUSE they knew what they really did re the leak, etc... Imo.

Why not go in there and fight and even erupt if they had to for all the world to see if Gull was so wrong. Why did never once they request a different judge for a year UNTIL they got themselves in a mess AND until their client confessed, etc. but actually EVEN THEN they didn't. She rules against them on the prison thing more than once, WHY NOT ask for recusal then and claim bias?

I've said it before and I will again, just the timing of ALL tells the real story.

I'm not being heated or emphatic with you, I hope you know that about me by now but at what is going on.

Do you trust the ISC? Seriously asking. It's your ISC.

If Gull screws up big time, it will be seen. Imo the ISC is letting it play out first at the trial court level which is where the D should have looked for remedy first. They didn't. They needed the diversion and big splash imo of the ISC filing. They couldn't even tell the ISC we have tried this remedy or that or went to hearing that day or ever tried motioning her, or asking for substitution or recusal!. They are either attorneys not boned up on the first avenues or more likely they wanted the splash, the public thinking oh look at them this means Gull is in trouble, etc., the diversion, and quite honestly probably needed the TIME it all took.

I'm waiting for them to file speedy trial AND see it through. Want to bet it doesn't happen and if it is filed, it isn't seen through?

I think the ISC knew full well what they were doing and a lot more about it than us. That's a compliment to your court by the way. :)
So you believe the defense should have filed a motion for Gull to recuse herself when she fired them? Can you explain how that would have worked?
 
That's not speculation about the name being wrong, Dulin had his name down as Richard Allen Whiteman. Also, they had to wait for KK conviction before they charged RA. Plus RL was never charged in this case. RA's motive was sexual IMO.

No, it's a show of incompetence. They should have had a single file for people they wanted to check out further. They weren't looking at him as the guy back in 2017. Suddenly, just before a Sheriff's election they found it. He may have helped, but why? All anybody has right now is speculation. My speculation isn't any different from anyone elses speculation here.

How do you explain his bullet at the crime scene?

Well, it's one of the things they held back, as they should, but it's matching seems a bit odd, to me. The fact that in the beginning they were certain that more than one person was involved, but after arresting RA it became one person.

All I'm trying to say is that what any of us have is speculation. After studying so many cases I've seen hinky stuff being done in order to just solve a case, guilt or innocence be damned. (I.E. Charles Merritt and Ruben "The Hurricane" Carter, The WM3 and cases from the innocence project.) I don't take what the prosecution says and just believe it. They don't have his DNA or fingerprints at the scene. Who knows what they have they're holding back from the defense.
 
So you believe the defense should have filed a motion for Gull to recuse herself when she fired them? Can you explain how that would have worked?
No, I am wondering why for a year they had NO problem with her?? They didn't have a problem when she ruled in their favor on medical records. They didn't have a problem when she let them slide on the first leak. They didn't have a problem when she ruled against moving Allen. They ONLY had a problem after he confessed, they leaked the O think publicly and LEAKED otherwise and were called out. And EVEN then they did NOT ask her to recuse herself did they or go to hearing?

TELL ME the above things are not true? Well by golly it was only when their OWN actions had went to far that it was a problem. SHE didnt' do that. This DUO had a YEAR if they felt her a problem AND even when they did have a problem or think there was one, they DID NOT FILE it at the local level. No?

I'm no expert but I get that much and so did the ISC more than we even do.

Believe what you like but it is all sooooo obvious. Stinkingly obvious.

And by the way medical records should be private to a point but she humored the dumb defense even thought hey tried to USE constantly his condition and more in which case then yes, the prosecution should have them! Discovery and being able to respond in kind with the same info does work in reverse.

TELL me WHY they never looked to get her off the case UNTIL they got in trouble for their own actions? I'm sure they considered her just great when she let them go with a slap the first time and ruled in favor on the records no?

It's a GAME by them, a PUBLIC fooling, distraction and attention to the wrong things.. And man do some fall for it.

I think BOTH courts know it. And the ISC, YOUR SC, did right. Let it play out where it should have yes. Are they truly that gutless... Lol. I have varied opinions on that.

\and yes, their right course of action was to file at the local level. Substitution is different than recusal but it's notable just like chiildren who don't like a teacher who gave them a cookie for five days and then said no for two, now they're going to have a fit.

They NEVER had a single raised recusal, substitution request or anything for a year did they Round Peg? And even when they raised issues, they went to the ISC. YES you file in local court first and if the local court is biased or you feel it is, THEN you go above and can show that unfair decision if you feel it is. That would possibly be added ammo to tell the ISC, hey we tried.

Guess what, they NEVER TRIED.

We had a state appeal in a companion case to our murder case. A decision was rendered as to what the trial court's decision did wrong and it was remanded BACK to that judge to correct it and hear it and let it go to hearing. I'm no expert but I understand enough, more than the average person. I'm not Olenna believe me who has a really pie in the sky opinion of our system AND a skewed view imo of all that goes on or maybe an agenda or biased one, I'm sure. No offense to her.

It was said even BEFORE the ISC hearing long before that on some other issue that they (D) didn't pursue the right course.

Don't get me wrong, this may all blow up in Gull's face depending on what she does BUT it may also end up in the defense's demise.

B & R do NOT care about RA. I feel sorry for him in that respect. That's my opinion and it's a strong one.

I am NOT yelling at you or anyone but B & R know or should know the avenues but what they are doing in not pursuing the required avenues is either sheer stupidity and how did they pass the bar and yet they rely on someone that didn't (isn['t that weird??) or it's all just acting blonde for a bigger show. I know what I think.

Again not yelling at you. They NEVER EVER went to remove the judge even when reprimanded for an earlier leak and far more. Tell me, DID THEY? DID THEY all the way up to filing to the ISC? WHY NOT?
 
So you believe the defense should have filed a motion for Gull to recuse herself when she fired them? Can you explain how that would have worked?
It maybe wouldn't have worked but that's the first course of action and then they'd be able to show they pursued the right courses of action first AND show what she said and decided. I am pretty sure that's the route.
 
No, I am wondering why for a year they had NO problem with her?? They didn't have a problem when she ruled in their favor on medical records. They didn't have a problem when she let them slide on the first leak. They didn't have a problem when she ruled against moving Allen. They ONLY had a problem after he confessed, they leaked the O think publicly and LEAKED otherwise and were called out. And EVEN then they did NOT ask her to recuse herself did they or go to hearing?

TELL ME the above things are not true? Well by golly it was only when their OWN actions had went to far that it was a problem. SHE didnt' do that. This DUO had a YEAR if they felt her a problem AND even when they did have a problem or think there was one, they DID NOT FILE it at the local level. No?

I'm no expert but I get that much and so did the ISC more than we even do.

Believe what you like but it is all sooooo obvious. Stinkingly obvious.

And by the way medical records should be private to a point but she humored the dumb defense even thought hey tried to USE constantly his condition and more in which case then yes, the prosecution should have them! Discovery and being able to respond in kind with the same info does work in reverse.

TELL me WHY they never looked to get her off the case UNTIL they got in trouble for their own actions? I'm sure they considered her just great when she let them go with a slap the first time and ruled in favor on the records no?

It's a GAME by them, a PUBLIC fooling, distraction and attention to the wrong things.. And man do some fall for it.

I think BOTH courts know it. And the ISC, YOUR SC, did right. Let it play out where it should have yes. Are they truly that gutless... Lol. I have varied opinions on that.

\and yes, their right course of action was to file at the local level. Substitution is different than recusal but it's notable just like chiildren who don't like a teacher who gave them a cookie for five days and then said no for two, now they're going to have a fit.

They NEVER had a single raised recusal, substitution request or anything for a year did they Round Peg? And even when they raised issues, they went to the ISC. YES you file in local court first and if the local court is biased or you feel it is, THEN you go above and can show that unfair decision if you feel it is. That would possibly be added ammo to tell the ISC, hey we tried.

Guess what, they NEVER TRIED.

We had a state appeal in a companion case to our murder case. A decision was rendered as to what the trial court's decision did wrong and it was remanded BACK to that judge to correct it and hear it and let it go to hearing. I'm no expert but I understand enough, more than the average person. I'm not Olenna believe me who has a really pie in the sky opinion of our system AND a skewed view imo of all that goes on or maybe an agenda or biased one, I'm sure. No offense to her.

It was said even BEFORE the ISC hearing long before that on some other issue that they (D) didn't pursue the right course.

Don't get me wrong, this may all blow up in Gull's face depending on what she does BUT it may also end up in the defense's demise.

B & R do NOT care about RA. I feel sorry for him in that respect. That's my opinion and it's a strong one.

I am NOT yelling at you or anyone but B & R know or should know the avenues but what they are doing in not pursuing the required avenues is either sheer stupidity and how did they pass the bar and yet they rely on someone that didn't (isn['t that weird??) or it's all just acting blonde for a bigger show. I know what I think.

Again not yelling at you. They NEVER EVER went to remove the judge even when reprimanded for an earlier leak and far more. Tell me, DID THEY? DID THEY all the way up to filing to the ISC? WHY NOT?
They never had a problem until they were ambushed in the judge's chambers.
 
I'm serious in this. Not a single eyewitness has talked to the news in all of these years. Not a single friend of Rick and Kathy's have. Bar owner said a little bit but nothing that would matter.

The PROSECUTION and people that know or knew RA etc. have stayed totally silent.

Does anyone really think no one knew them or they knew no one? They were bar flies, he worked retail in a small town.

There WAS a domestic. No charges. That's a hint of they are local and known and got given a break.

His sh*t was not able to be looked up by computer as the entry and name was wrong. Or that's what we are told at least.

A new sheriff comes to town and think about it not as election but what was hidden gets pulled... Before he gets elected and finds it...

Emu take your conspiracy thinking and turn it around...

I'm not even sure this is true but it makes a TON more sense than what you think. Hes a local boy, a beer drinker, patronizes the local businesses and bar and that's the midwest let me tell ya. If you do that, you know almost everyone...
 
02/07/2024Order Issued
The Court, having defendant's Verified Motion to Disqualify (filed January 28, 2024), Defendant's Affidavit (filed January 28, 2024), and Certification of Richard Allen's Attorneys (filed January 28, 2024) under advisement and having considered the pleadings, now denies the Verified Motion to Disqualify without hearing as the Indiana Supreme Court unanimously denied Defendant's previous request on January 18, 2024.
Judicial Officer:
Gull, Frances -SJ

Order Signed:
02/06/2024
 
02/07/2024Motion to Dismiss Filed
Motion to Dismiss for Destroying Exculpatory Evidence
Filed By:
Allen, Richard M.
File Stamp:
02/07/2024
02/07/2024Memorandum/Brief Filed
Memorandum of Law in Support of Dismissal
Filed By:
Allen, Richard M.
File Stamp:
02/07
 
02/07/2024Motion to Dismiss Filed
Motion to Dismiss for Destroying Exculpatory Evidence
Filed By:
Allen, Richard M.
File Stamp:
02/07/2024
02/07/2024Memorandum/Brief Filed
Memorandum of Law in Support of Dismissal
Filed By:
Allen, Richard M.
File Stamp:
02/07

I guess it will become an appellate issue.
 
And it's your speculation that the two people who knew RL very well were completely wrong, that a guys file that admitted to being there was "accidentally" filed wrong and it took them five years to find it, that his confessions weren't given to police in an interview room, but over a recorded phone line that we haven't heard, that in the beginning they were looking for more than one person, but changed their minds after arresting RA?

Also, a man who's never had a violent past, or since the two killings, just decided one day to kill two young girls?

That sounds more conspiratorial than the Odinist theory.
They clearly were wrong or RL would have been charged with murder years ago rather than RA just 16 months ago.
 
Last edited:
If it wasn't so frustrating I'd really have to laugh.

First of all, the ISC left Gull in place. The higher court ruled.

Second of all B & R also wanted a ruling on speedy trial which they never filed for and so was a moot point.

Now they are reinstated but lost on the other two points and where is their filing for speedy trial? Instead they are looking for delays and even though I'm rarely here pretty sure i predicted this many pages back. It was a no brainer.

Why are they not going for speedy??

They said hey we are ready, researched, etc. and want to go.

So file it and let's go.

Send out the two clowns and their unlicensed failing friend rather than bringing in the clowns. How I see it. Jmo.
Because they are nowhere near ready and don't have a defence for their client. They should just have RA plead insanity.
 
I'm questioning why it seems acceptable to say it's okay for Gull to schedule the "prosecution" motion for a contempt hearing against the Defense when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It also seems acceptable for Gull to ignore the motion by defense to recuse herself when the Supreme Court handed down a decision.

It seems to me to be picking sides vs "let's get this to trial and let a jury decide".
The contempt hearing is based on new evidence isn't it? The fact he was working as an unlicensed lawyer with access to documentation against the gag order.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,374
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom