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:
Do you have the layout of the building per chance? Do they have designated interview and different interrogation rooms?

I ask because I've never been inside an interview room or interrogation room in my life. I dont know how to tell the difference.

If you know the differences, then wow ha ha. I'm kidding. :)
I just know how it's done here. They are all called "interview rooms" when taking anybody in that comes in for interview/questioning. It's far less costly and there is no reason to have it be different. The difference is if you are free to go or not.
 
Last edited:
The motion narrative describes how the D has been asking for the miranda evidence for a while and the P went and looked for it and had to acknowledge they didn't have the paper record, nor the first part of the interview. Maybe the P's response will provide a timeline of their response etc...
I would want it on video. Nobody should be answering any questions without it being on video... They also should not go in without representation ESPECIALLY if you are Innocent and they feel the need to separate you from your wife to ask.
 
Big picture: Motion to suppress critical interview w/ Holeman. (IMO, it will not be suppressed.)
Relevant question: What's the purpose/strategy of the motion? Why now?

So ... that is a question I have that matches your questions: "Why now?"

The difference is, my "why now" question is brought from the point of view that there's a strategic reason ... what could it be?

While your "why now" question is brought from your point of view that the Defense are blubbering stumbling irresponsible idiots.

IMO, We are NOT debating. We are on completely different planets, wearing completely different glasses, holding a different definition of "debate".

Anyway, download/read the motion. 11 quick pages. Skip Tom. It's a very quick read. Quotes the interview(s). It's short, punchy. It's juicy. You'll find new stuff in there you never knew. (Although, there's none of that detail you express frustration about above.)
Oh stop. I am crying from chuckling so hard.

You are still wearing your eclipse glasses imo lol.

Different planets. Probably. You are gone a lot and seem to saturate in only this case when you are here. Is it your only and why? Just wondering, you certainly do not have to answer.

If you say we are not debating then I guess we are not lol. I can't debate alone. Well I can and do at times with self but LOL that's another story.

You zoom in and then zoom off to your planet. I get it.

No thanks. This is not my top case or priority today. I will get to it in time. Or to Tom. And someone unlike us without a strong bias.

After the last defense filing I wasted half my life reading, I am done with it. I have never regretted anything so much I don't think.

I am also not going to lose part of my life getting into an interrogation room discussion, etc.

At least it's new and not old rehashed stuff in this case though I guess.

I do think we can all agree, it will be a relief to see this tried if indeed it is, in May.

Of course you'd don't have to agree and maybe things are different on our respective planets. I know I am on earth where I don't fall for thinking like what a defense files to a supreme court is a decision by the supreme court. Sorry but I saw plenty of that and it was not factual.

Even so, all in good humor but if you don\t agree with that, fine also.

Also in humor and an attempt at lightness that disappears in this thread how many planets have you traveled to? I only have one alternate planet. Haven't made it to the rest yet. I'm lucky to get home to it once in a blue moon. Oh and have you been to the moon too? I haven't done that either.

Anyhow thank you, I have laughed my arse off much needed and dont' get to that often. :hugs:
 
Yeah, that's me thinking SURELY they took care of that.

In the motion the defense asserts that the discovery they received has no record of miranda happening.

Really, it's easier to just read the motion. You'll be rewarded with actual quotes. Pulled out of context, but ... actual quotes.
I am going to stick up for Tresir and myself here too I read one of the last full things the defense filed and was such a waste of my time and never again and she started to and gave up. Thank God for people like Tom. Others cover them too but with their bias in either direction.

I get few days off and never am on top of all and I am not wasting another on a defense filing in this case. That said I follow one of the least biased people I have seen in this case who does read them.
 
Oh stop. I am crying from chuckling so hard.

You are still wearing your eclipse glasses imo lol.

Different planets. Probably. You are gone a lot and seem to saturate in only this case when you are here. Is it your only and why? Just wondering, you certainly do not have to answer.

If you say we are not debating then I guess we are not lol. I can't debate alone. Well I can and do at times with self but LOL that's another story.

You zoom in and then zoom off to your planet. I get it.

No thanks. This is not my top case or priority today. I will get to it in time. Or to Tom. And someone unlike us without a strong bias.

After the last defense filing I wasted half my life reading, I am done with it. I have never regretted anything so much I don't think.

I am also not going to lose part of my life getting into an interrogation room discussion, etc.

At least it's new and not old rehashed stuff in this case though I guess.

I do think we can all agree, it will be a relief to see this tried if indeed it is, in May.

Of course you'd don't have to agree and maybe things are different on our respective planets. I know I am on earth where I don't fall for thinking like what a defense files to a supreme court is a decision by the supreme court. Sorry but I saw plenty of that and it was not factual.

Even so, all in good humor but if you don\t agree with that, fine also.

Also in humor and an attempt at lightness that disappears in this thread how many planets have you traveled to? I only have one alternate planet. Haven't made it to the rest yet. I'm lucky to get home to it once in a blue moon. Oh and have you been to the moon too? I haven't done that either.

Anyhow thank you, I have laughed my arse off much needed and dont' get to that often. :hugs:
YW. Glad you're entertained.
I'm on Earth, 2024 at the moment. We could debate which one of us in the alternate dimension, but I see that getting nowhere as well. So, nevermind. :sunburst: Oh look! My earth has a sun ... so hot it has to wear shades. Does yours?
 
I am going to stick up for Tresir and myself here too I read one of the last full things the defense filed and was such a waste of my time and never again and she started to and gave up. Thank God for people like Tom. Others cover them too but with their bias in either direction.

I get few days off and never am on top of all and I am not wasting another on a defense filing in this case. That said I follow one of the least biased people I have seen in this case who does read them.
Oh, I see.
Gosh, I'm sorry that I recommended reading something that's on your banned books list. :unsure:

READ IT ANYWAY. 🤣
 
Interview rooms have a one way mirror don't they and there is always a uniformed officer in there too, right. And a video recorder (unless someone left it on for months and it recorded over itself LOL). This was Lafayette so they should have better facilities hopefully.
No. That's for the movies. :giggling:
They have cameras in all the interview rooms (and they better be on!). The only difference is if you are free to go or not. If you are, you are being interviewed. If you are not, you are being interrogated.

Did he ever ask if he was free to go? They sure aren't going to volunteer that info, especially if they REALLY want to talk to you.
 
I would want it on video. Nobody should be answering any questions without it being on video... They also should not go in without representation ESPECIALLY if you are Innocent and they feel the need to separate you from your wife to ask.
That is what you feel wise and I can see where you come from with it but I know you are not saying if they talked freely and agreed without representation, were not under control and were free to leave that LE did anything wrong.

Just making that clear.

I am different and maybe it woudln't be wise but if I was innocent, I'd willingly talk to them. And many/most would. If I were guilty is not easy for me to place in such shoes as I'd never do such a thing but I can see where guilty people would to, to show sure, I've got nothing to hide and try to show they didn't do it.

Whatever the case, I doubt defense has anything here. And while it is better to read filings and be informed before speaking as I am, I am NOT reading another defense motion in this case. People need to be able to survive and not go through that or lose their lives in reading one or all time, I swear. Did it. Never again.
 
That is what you feel wise and I can see where you come from with it but I know you are not saying if they talked freely and agreed without representation, were not under control and were free to leave that LE did anything wrong.

Just making that clear.

I am different and maybe it woudln't be wise but if I was innocent, I'd willingly talk to them. And many/most would. If I were guilty is not easy for me to place in such shoes as I'd never do such a thing but I can see where guilty people would to, to show sure, I've got nothing to hide and try to show they didn't do it.

Whatever the case, I doubt defense has anything here. And while it is better to read filings and be informed before speaking as I am, I am NOT reading another defense motion in this case. People need to be able to survive and not go through that or lose their lives in reading one or all time, I swear. Did it. Never again.
guess what?
If you're not reading the motion, rules say, you can't discuss it. :nope: Who's rules, you ask? RULES OF ENGAGEMENT.
What? You won't read those rules either?
I give up. :runningaway:
 
The P gets to answer the D's motion of course ... waiting on that. (Happy thought: It's nice to read the D motion so you can enjoy the P's response!)

Nice to see all. ... I've got to bounce.

Happy reading (cough, cough) and stuff!
 
Yeah, that's me thinking SURELY they took care of that.

In the motion the defense asserts that the discovery they received has no record of miranda happening.

Really, it's easier to just read the motion. You'll be rewarded with actual quotes. Pulled out of context, but ... actual quotes.
I would be insisting on the recording. Question answered real easy. If the day there isn't a recording, you open a whole new set of motions as to why and what are they hiding etc etc etc.

I'm not in on this on whether he was or wasn't but how is this just now being addressed and once you found out your client was brought in under false pretenses, why this was not asked immediately and sought out. I am not seeing any good out of an attorney that does this.
 
YW. Glad you're entertained.
I'm on Earth, 2024 at the moment. We could debate which one of us in the alternate dimension, but I see that getting nowhere as well. So, nevermind. :sunburst: Oh look! My earth has a sun ... so hot it has to wear shades. Does yours?
Nah, I don't like shades. They hide the eyes and the truth. Sunny here today too and I want the full force. I take down light globes and covers and put in brighter bulbs, I tear down window shades and I never wear sunglasses. Why dim that beautiful sun? That's just me though. We had a day recently where it rained like for 36 hours heavily with few stops. Well I guess that is more than a day but truth. Cold rain, cold weather and wind. Really glad to see Mr. or Ms. Sun today.

Yeah it is 2024 here also. I guess we are on some same pages LMAO. Just no shades. I have no reason to hide my eyes. And am not trying to be cool or a movie star or anything lol. Sorry, I just got into a stupid chuckling time and still in it.

I assume likewise it is 2024 in Indiana, Planet Earth, zip code unknown. And a Miranda thing is something that should have been filed and asked abotu if not 18 months ago well then long before a couple of weeks before trial.

And I used to be a full document reader when I had time but even if I still did and was, I think it is clear you can't play a few of us enough to read another defense filing in this case. I see some in full on Tom or hear the summaries. I trust him sorry more than I do some here, all of whom I love, OR myself because we all have biases, self included in this case. I go watch someone who makes me check myself sorry more than you can. Because he is so darned fair.

I am pretty sure I am the first one if you look back who first saw the crazy O filing and came in here and said as much and an OMG or what the heck or some such. So yeay, I follow pretty darned well and always have.

And recently as also said read a full motion to my eternal regret.

What other cases do you follow and what is your opinion on them?

Mine vary. I truly base them case by case not just because I am always defense or prosecution although it tends to generally be prosecution but I see guilt long before chared where there is no prosecution in many cases OR I doubt guilt or foul play too.

I don't see you in any others to know how you are in all or what you tend towards.

Anyhow, okay we are not debating and I guess I shouldn't say I enjoy discussing either as you will say we aren't doing that either lol.

By the way I have eyeglasses too and guess what? I don't wear them.

Anyhow happy sunny day!

if this one actually goes off on time I may well have to take a leave of absence to watch. However, not even know if will be live yet and not sure I could take the defense attys. anyhow. I saw enough of that recently too or read it I should say and heard of it... Can't stay on point for anything.

It isn't any secret some of us disagree but I guess certainly plenty are interested in this one at least and disagree and each have our own opinions but I suppose you'd disagree with my saying that too? LOL.

At least there's some damned real interest. See way too many others where there is none.

And because I haen't yet today and Daybell was the one I was on most, I am going to end this by saying RIP Abby, Libby, Tylee and JJ and all other victims and may justice come your way.
 
Oh, I see.
Gosh, I'm sorry that I recommended reading something that's on your banned books list. :unsure:

READ IT ANYWAY. 🤣
I don't believe in banning books nor burning books lmao however, I have made an exception. And their filings ARE BOOK LENGTH like some of my posts lol. I can say that because I do what they do. LMAO. And one reason I am no attorney nor could be, I could not write effectively, to the point and briefly if needed when something mattered.

So their filings are on my NO READ LIST as are CHAD DAYBELL'S BOOKS. And I dare say both are on the list of many others for the very same reasons.

I am not going to go find it and read it. I have a cat pan to change lol that is not a favorite chore but sounds a lot more desirable than reading another motion of theirs. However, if you want to bring it forward and link it I may consider it but not sure what you think it will change and if I regret it and am irritated to no end by it as usual I will find your version of planet earth or where you reside and come :fryingpan: you. And you'd better :cowcouch:
 
I would be insisting on the recording. Question answered real easy. If the day there isn't a recording, you open a whole new set of motions as to why and what are they hiding etc etc etc.

I'm not in on this on whether he was or wasn't but how is this just now being addressed and once you found out your client was brought in under false pretenses, why this was not asked immediately and sought out. I am not seeing any good out of an attorney that does this.
Saw this while exiting ... Grandmabear has same Q's ... the D asked P for the beginning of the recording - that's where miranda is handled, and the D had to wait for the P to search for it, and then get back to them confirming the first part of the interrogation is ... not on record. Next, D searches for possible miranda paperwork - no paperwork. Maybe I'm missing something but is that not the process? D thinks there is missing discovery, asks for it, the P says okay I'll get back to you, P goes and looks for it, that takes x time, P tells D they looked and they found nothing, D does further research, checks and double checks if there's a paper miranda, there's not, D preps motion. We've seen a series of such complaints from the D about incomplete discovery and P's had to go searching, and/or answer previous motions as to their explanation for the incomplete discovery. IMO, this is just more of that. The sticky thing here ... the think the D can't bring a motion without having verified the fact that the beginning of the interrogation is indeed MISSING ... it likely took time for the P to get that confirmed by LE. The beginning of the interrogation is - in fact - missing.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,332
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom