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:
FWIW I do recall this. I think the D mentioned this in papers filed re: holding conditions, maybe even Scremin/Lebrato? Some diving to do there but I can't get to it anytime soon.

The coerced confession related discovery will remain confidential ... unless/until there's a public hearing ...
JMHO
So then it is defense trolls/walkers? Interesting. Hmmm. Putting shi*t out there via YTers having them spread on sites and go to sites to put this sh*t in everywhere they can. Wow.
 
I've already stated my views on the whole miranda issue. My opinion is this was an interrogation, he was not free to leave, and should have been mirandized.
Agree; it was a custodial interrogation, a miranda specific to that interrogation is the standard per Indiana interrogation rules, IMO.
Must ISP follow the rules to the letter? Exceptions? Judge will weigh in.
 
Yeah, I think I'd be a bit ticked if my other half didn't save me from myself after being separated for hours and figured out the reason why we were there was bogus. It seems like at least one of them should have figured something out that this was not just a friendly chit chat. Especially if he had been Mirandized prior. Maybe shoulda taken the part about being told what you say could be used against you a bit more seriously?
EXACTAMUNDO. Of course this is the woman he confessed to, hung up, but still supports him now.

I guarantee you the defense filing is less than a tenth of the story or truth.

And I still can't figure how she expected to take two cars home once he WAS arrested. So I am only partially believing the car stuff either.

I am happy to wait for the P response although I wouldn't count on them disputing or sharing more than they have to. they play tight to the vest. It is only the D trying to wage a public campaign with selective tidbits. I wonder if interrogation rooms had windows how many would have cut themselves on glass by now... LOL LOL LOL. And if large and not tiny OMG OMG OMG. Some of what is in there is so ridiculous it is funny but isn't but is.
 
What about the 14 day thing? Or is that not valid for some reason?
From all I have heard it seems like it very well could be and is certainly a factor, as is much else, STILL. None of this is anything but D so far with no full facts or determination, just one sided claims. And no P response either yet.
 
So then it is defense trolls/walkers? Interesting. Hmmm. Putting shi*t out there via YTers having them spread on sites and go to sites to put this sh*t in everywhere they can. Wow.
In filed papers to the court as I recall, an investigator for the D, while physically at the prison, got this info from RA prison records, and the filing expressed concern over the LE visit. Papers stated the D was conducting further investigation into this apparent LE contact w/o RA attny present. There may have been an affidavit from the investigator submitted? ... should others have time to dig.
 
Last edited:
Agree; it was a custodial interrogation, a miranda specific to that interrogation is the standard per Indiana interrogation rules, IMO.
Must ISP follow the rules to the letter? Exceptions? Judge will weigh in.
Oh come on. They dragged him back there by force and blocked him from leaving? Then I truly don't get why wife didn't go get an attorney, etc. Provide the proof please? None of this is determined or known YET. And don't quote me an "excerpt" from D. Thank you kindly.
 
Yeah, I think I'd be a bit ticked if my other half didn't save me from myself after being separated for hours and figured out the reason why we were there was bogus. It seems like at least one of them should have figured something out that this was not just a friendly chit chat. Especially if he had been Mirandized prior. Maybe shoulda taken the part about being told what you say could be used against you a bit more seriously?
"You go get the car"
"No you go get the car, I don't want to be arrested. I'll just drive off. Ring me if any probs"
 
In papers as I recall, an investigator for the D, while physically at the prison, got this info from RA prison records, and the filing expressed concern over the LE visit. Papers stated the D was conducting further investigation into this apparent LE contact w/o RA attny present. There may have been an affidavit from the investigator submitted? ... should others have time to dig.
Not me. I've wasted enough time on this Miranda/no miranda issue. Let the judge decide.
 
What about the 14 day thing? Or is that not valid for some reason?

@Olenna ditto

INDY regs for custodial interrogations state the miranda requirement.

D argues that the 14 day window ... is the standard for non-custodial interviews. And that argument is consistent w/ the regs. We'll see if Gull agrees. IMO, this a technical argument as to what is the law. Holeman, several days later, (Nov 1) included in his notes that that at beginning of interrogation he'd reminded RA of the Oct 13 Miranda warning. So there is that later notation on the LE record.
 
Oh come on. They dragged him back there by force and blocked him from leaving? Then I truly don't get why wife didn't go get an attorney, etc. Provide the proof please? None of this is determined or known YET. And don't quote me an "excerpt" from D. Thank you kindly.
Detective H. "Don't go anywhere, I'll be back in a minute."

H calls CC. "Hey guys, come over quick. Guess who just walked in?"
 
A word to the wise. I'm assuming wise anyhow. Purporting something as fact and trying to make it urban, Delphi or IN legend or State of IN v Allen FACT when it is NOT, by stating things as fact that aren't instead of stating it as OPINION, isn't something I'd do. I don't care what anyone does so go ahead, I dont' care as it is obvious to me it is isn't fact and is simply trying to be made fact, but I'd think twice about doing such. Anyhow, it might work on some idiots out there who then will all repeat it as if fact but I know it doesn't work on me and all in here, every single one has more intelligence than that.

I'm talking of buyerninety of course lol. ;)

Almost time to go.
 
Just in case any have forgotten Daybell is back on today. I wont' be able to watch of course. Kohberger has a more detailed but ridiculous alibi now and some other cases have things going on as well. I hadn't realized it was Monday until a moment ago. Saturdays are my Mondays or always feel like it so I get thrown off as my week runs different than the standard.
 
INDY regs for custodial interrogations state the miranda requirement.

D argues that the 14 day window ... is the standard for non-custodial interviews. And that argument is consistent w/ the regs. We'll see if Gull agrees. IMO, this a technical argument as to what is the law. Holeman, several days later, (Nov 1) included in his notes that that at beginning of interrogation he'd reminded RA of the Oct 13 Miranda warning. So there is that later notation on the LE record.
So this should be ok then as it wasnt Holeman who arrested him but CC. IMO
 
It is exactly that, a template. A blank. I know you get it and you now I get it lol. At best it is included in case needed or judge decides to sign/use. Just as judge's will have one attorney or another draft a final order, JUST as the D did with that dumb proposed order they drafted for Gull in that one recent filing as if she'd agree to or say any of the longwinded idiotic half of it stuff in it and sign such. Doesn't mean it ever happens, ever would or was filed lmao. This though, this is just a blank form no executed nor ever filed. If one was, then it isn't this one. :D
Plus both sides would have a copy that was fully filled out and signed, so why just attach the template and not the official filing unless there isn't one?
 
FWIW I do recall this. I think the D mentioned this in papers filed re: holding conditions, maybe even Scremin/Lebrato? Some diving to do there but I can't get to it anytime soon.

The coerced confession related discovery will remain confidential ... unless/until there's a public hearing ...
JMHO
Huh? What coerced confession was that?
 
Huh? What coerced confession was that?
*Sorry, just mean we're not gonna know much about it w/o a hearing - and * Referenced that hearing would be the Suppression Motion related to prison Confession filed by the Defense within the last week or so; Motion argues confessions while in custody be suppressed due to holding conditions being coercive, etc.. See docket.

quick edit here * - for clarity.
 
Last edited:
If there isn't one he shouldn't be in jail, JMO
OR there is one that is filled out correctly and for some reason they CHOSE not to attach that. Something is not right when they choose to post something that is just a template and choose to represent it as a real document when there is 100% one that is filled out and filed, right? Why did they CHOOSE to use this one and not the actual one when it would be part of their clients records and they would have a copy of it? That choice they voluntarily made makes me dismiss this piece of paper and what it says when there is 100% chance one that is filled out.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,367
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom