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:
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.
Good point. Maybe have a look through that Google drive and see if there is one. It would be stand alone or part of the PCA
 
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.
I am going to resist commenting to this because I believe I recall a bit about it both here in the responses and the response to it as well not in here. However I am not going to say it and put out wrong info without making sure of it. As far as others with time to dig, I am worthless at figuring out how to search back in a thread. I can usually search more generally with words to find a case thread I can't recall a name in, etc. with key words but that's about it.

I do know the poster was not friendly or knew how to talk or post not that all of us in here are always the most friendly to each other with heated opinions but hey still going on. So would think that says something.

However, then emu goes way back in this thread and pulls this out out of the blue. Don't know that I've ever known him to do that.

It seems to me this was debunked or at least answered. However, I'll refrain for the moment.

It seemed to me like a lot of what has went on in this case, the spreading of one thing that one side wants heard through conduits and here comes someone into here doing so. The very same thing D has been doing all along. Hope the poster here dind't suicide like the other person because they sure did disappear.

That alone says enough. Which was one of my points said without really having to say or go into it as all should realize. All were here.
 
If there isn't one he shouldn't be in jail, JMO
I don't think this is any big deal. It just wasn't the form you provided anything official in proving a date (date now known thanks to you) as it was never signed, filed, stamped, etc. so it couldn't prove the date he was taken into custody. Clearly it was provided or written for Diener's signarure way back when. You did not provide it to prove such was executed but believed the date at that point because it was put in a document never used is all.

All I mean is I dont' have any more back and forth on it because the date of taken into custody has been found. It was simply though a blanket form, document provided in some filing that at that point wasn't executed nor maybe ever was or a new one or one by the court was. Attorneys provide suggested orders to judges all the time and that's all it looked like.

Doesn't mean that's the blank or form that ends up signed.

It just wans't proof of the date because they said that in there as it was an nonexecuted document. Don't know how to put it any plainer other than we were all about the date and that is now known as to when he was arrested/in custody/not free.
 
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?
I take it she found a file dump of early days where someone just attached or gave an order for the first judge to sign. She was providing it as proof of the date of arrest/custody which was the question/debate. My problem with it like yours is that it wasn't executed which could have meant they did it ahead and arrest did not happen on that date or they waited a day or some such and so it wasn't proof of date as not executed.

I'm not so much wondering if one ever was, so much as I was saying that wasn't evidnenece of the date of arrest as they could have had something happen, waited a day, to was after midnight, needed to redraft, etc.

Yes there should be a fully signed and executed one both parties have but I don't really doubt there was, there simply was no proof one was from that doc o r that it wasnt' signed because something changed.

In otherr words, I don't doubt one was. I just could not take that one as proof of date of arrest since not an executed copy.
 
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?"
Yep that's one of several possible scenarios. And without full context which of course D never provides, it is a nothing burger so far. It truly is. This is so late in the game it is not even funny. Even @Guess Who who hasn't been here as much in the past montths as the rest of us can see that. Did they ever even TALK to their client about the basics? The first thing you do is the Miranda/arrest thing. It just happened in Doerhman and it went his way. @Olenna I've asked you before and maybe I missed it as I am always behind but do you follow any other cases. What did you think about the Doerman case and decision? And it is one of their first things, sure not the last thing from D.

No full context has been given and I'm sorry but some put things out here as if they are fact and decided. As if P has responded. P decided. As if all facts are known and already being called an interrogation and an interrogation room, etc. LMAO.

IF ISP did real wrong and that can be determined than one thing I have to say is this state is in real trouble as I If extends from the judge to Delphi to the feds to the ISP and more. My goodness.

However, my guess is they did as LE can do and they CAN DO what they can that is legal where changes keep making it almost impossible for LE to do their jobs these days (there are both sides to that as to good ones and a few bad ones) and from our experience with the defense, it is always smoke and no mea in the smoker. As always late to the game.

What is really interesting to me? NOTHING is going on out there. Both the bad ones that knew who they were getting it all from and the ones who maybe weren't bad but were being passed on info and to spread sh*t all over and who maybe believed it or figured they didn't do it or share it but just uhm referred to it are SILENT. That's REALLY interesting to me. Do you know how many went wild and lost their minds after the FM? But then the leak sh*t started later and some stayed with it and as sh*t happened, all STF up. And it is silent now. Well there's Tom still talking the case but he was never on the train. Lol. Quiet as a tomb out there. AT least where I saw just the opposite a few months ago. In here we have discussed it out there everyone who was all over it is non-existent who went wild with ONE narrative.

Yeah, I'm not different than anyone when it is new and people here or some thought big, I wondered but am at now here I think it is a big nothing burger. I've seen too much of the defense and their lateness and antics and desperation because they weren't on their job and their client confessed.

We aren't ever going to know full sh*t unless we see it or hear it all. I'd sure hope IN has a reporter that plans on being a Nate? From what I've seen most have dropped this case with almost no reporting and that includes some nation news shows who did a lot on the O thing, etc. Dead silent now.
 
Wow. Thank you for that. (I think LOL).

May have some questions in a couple of days.
Just watch Tom. Lol. He gives both sides heck and the judge when deserved. And covers it all.

And for those that don't know has read every last single thing, attachment you name it. He's bit anal that way. I mean that in a nice way. But you can count on it.
 
Just watch Tom. Lol. He gives both sides heck and the judge when deserved. And covers it all.

And for those that don't know has read every last single thing, attachment you name it. He's bit anal that way. I mean that in a nice way. But you can count on it.
Oh, Tom, Tom, Tom - that's all you keep saying.
 
I take it she found a file dump of early days where someone just attached or gave an order for the first judge to sign. She was providing it as proof of the date of arrest/custody which was the question/debate. My problem with it like yours is that it wasn't executed which could have meant they did it ahead and arrest did not happen on that date or they waited a day or some such and so it wasn't proof of date as not executed.

I'm not so much wondering if one ever was, so much as I was saying that wasn't evidnenece of the date of arrest as they could have had something happen, waited a day, to was after midnight, needed to redraft, etc.

Yes there should be a fully signed and executed one both parties have but I don't really doubt there was, there simply was no proof one was from that doc o r that it wasnt' signed because something changed.

In otherr words, I don't doubt one was. I just could not take that one as proof of date of arrest since not an executed copy.
That's exactly my point. There was a reason why THIS one wasn't executed. There has to be one that is fully executed so why post this one? It's THIS one i have a problem with as "proof".
 
What precisely is this all about?


DELPHI, Ind. — Former Rushville Police Chief Todd Click's investigation into Odinists being involved in the killings of Delphi teenagers Libby German and Abby Williams makes him a witness for Richard Allen's defense, and Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland now wants Click's personnel records.

McLeland indicates in his Tuesday motion that prosecutors believe Click's employee records will show incidents of untruthfulness or credibility issues. The motion includes a subpoena ordering the Rushville police chief to turn over those documents. However, as of Tuesday morning, Special Judge Frances Gull has not signed the subpoena.
 
Don't recall coming across the car being returned and have seen no reference to KA on the 26th other than she went to ISP w/ RA to retrieve a car and did not speak w/ LE herself.



I've provided information as to the different miranda requirements - and Indiana regulations - as to non-custodial interviews and custodial interrogations.
Defense motions argues no, the miranda on the 13th for a non-custodial interview is - technically transferrable to a non-custodial interview days later. But it is NOT transferrable to a custodial interrogation days later. i.e. different miranda rules for these different types of interview/interrogation ... custodial/non-custodial.

My comments here are technical; I do think - practically speaking - the Court can consider local practice in their decision making here ... hopefully documenting her thinking rather than issuing instant denial.

One critical consideration is that the car pick up was clearly a ruse to get RA into an interrogation that resulted in taking him into custody. JMHO
At the outset you can't confirm anything about the car, at the end of your post it is a ruse.

KA couldn't drive both cars home with Rick in custody. Did she even stay to get it? SOmething said somewhere she wasn't allowed to go back with him (not saying it was ou, dn't know but someoone or something did maybe their filing, but you say she never went inside.

Anyhow you don't know so say so.

I guess it depends on a ruse. LE has already searched, taken the car, etc. and are hot on probably getting a warrant for arrest and they call about their car. And yes, let's see if we can say we have a few more questions. How is it the car was a ruse if KA never even went in or checked to see if she could get it when maybe he said something in his questioning or they were about ready to arrest him to begin with and then he/not they came in?

Do you know where the car ended up being , when she got it back and where it was?

I kind of doubt it.

As far as I can tell, much of what you say are statements as if fact and not opinion. You did he same throughout the ISC filings and so on. And ALL always comes from only defense claims.

And yet you say you are undecided, have no opinion and will wait for trial.

Seriously. Just asking? What is the deal? I mean you know what the rest of us don't? Is that it? Or we don't have any brain cells?

Not attacking, just wondering. DO you follow any other cases? Some reason this one is your pet and you state things as fact that aren't?

Is it political? Did Gull steal your bf in high school. Lol. I am seriously asking where this all comes from? What do you think about Daybell? Doerman? How Miranda has come up in some other cases on here recently?

I'd really like to know.
I hear you on the long posts.

I'm sure someone will cover the trial but not sure who it will be. I'm on the other end of the state so I'm not even sure who is near there as far as news/affiliates. Would have to check back and see who didn't get banned for bad behavior.
Yeah I am sure the long posts was sarcasm or tongue in cheek lol. Little doubt.

Well I hope so, I've not hard of a soul intending to do so if not live nor of anyone who will cover it in the manner Nate, and now his associates while he is gone, do with tweets throughout each day of all going on.

in fact how many have attended hearings or are they not allowed to? I know there is "after" coverage but I'm talking live tweeted updates continually.
 
I don't have Facebook so couldn't see the actual post. Thanks for copy pasta.

Ok so ISP Lafayette interviewed him on the 26th, where he was then handcuffed and taken to Delphi for two days, being formally arrested and charged at Delphi two days later on the 28th.

So that 27th document was not relevant I guess or prepared for use the next day?

Glad that's sorted out.

Did Carroll County mirandize him again? They took him on the 26th so it would still be the 13th day so not technically necessary as he was still covered by the one they gave him on the 13th.

That is now the question D needs to look at so IMO, they are wrong.

Funny the answer was on FB the whole time LOL.

:sigh: (Sigh of relief)
Wouldn't surprise me if it was on LE's website/s too, not just FB but it would take some searching as it wasn't exactly yesterday. That document is still a bit odd but don't really see how it matters now.

I'd think on actual arrest he was mirandized. That doesn't answer whether he needed to be before informal questioning he willingly it seems agreed to. And there's also the 14 day thing s you say. I'm a bit behind but I don't think too far, so may have missed more on it so far, but I don't think there's been much top put me too far behind as Daybell is the more active one right now for all of us again since court resumed yesterday and the weekend ended. Well most.
 
I think she will deny it based on the fact he was only in the Holeman interview voluntarily, initially. It only became custodial once he was handcuffed and taken to Carroll County IMO.
That's how I see it this far as well.
 
I think Holeman was purposely effing and blinding in that interview to wind him up and it worked. RA knew the deal- they had already searched his house, taken numerous weapons and other stuff plus his car. It will be very interesting to see what else he said in that two hours that preceded the arrest, which the D want suppressed.
Yes it will, if we ever get to.

I wonder a lot of things about the tons missing. There is something no doubt they want gone . Rick shows some real attitude in a few of the things shown and I wonder if he didn't show a few more true colors. That whole "reputation' thing kind of makes me pause. Other than the fact most townsfolk may just stay really quiet, there was little after Rick's arrest to indicate any reputation, his being well known, any good friends speaking out in disbelief etc. WHAT reputation? I recall a bar owner but even he dind't go too far.

He denied anyone else ever had his gun and also denied ever being on Logan's property... This is one big problem we know of there. He left no outs that way. Never hunted there, and never did anyone else have access to his gun. I think that's one problem but I suspect there's more. However, what I don't believe is that RA confessed to LE in this interview so it's nothing like that. Imo. He tripped on things besides the gun I am guessing...

I'm not sure how much Holeman would have to do. He and wife have already been the midst of searches, missing a vehicle, etc. and probably stressed and not going well at home to the max and still working I gather if they needed the car... I'm sure wife was on him and after him as to what the heck was going on I'd imagine, their lives were turned upside down, he wasn't arrested yet then but... Who knows if she even knew prior he was AT the trails for all the past years? Did she?

I saw it appeared they interviewed her it seems at two work places if I recall correctly? I am WAITING for those as well or did that mention just mean they contacted her there and asked her to come in. Boy do I want to see her interviews as much almost as his. The voice alone with his is going to be a thing. Maybe he slipped and said I never told any girls to go or get "down the hill" gol dammit!

I've not thrown Gull under the bus and seen no reason to yet but if she does not allow some kind of full coverage of this even if only audio, she will make my sh*t list.

I also to this day fail to see the reason for all the sealing unless there is something else connecting to more that we don't know of. In our case, it kind of shocked even our side but I knew we could go down and get every record and filing throughout the three year long process from charging to trial. My family did not know this but I did. I coudln't do it as wasn't local but when my sister was told this, she went and did it all. And got each and every single thing long before trial and as all proceeded. Multiple trips. AFte the first time, they knew of course as I asked the investigator why they couldn't use a a certain picture of his house, what this meant, what that meant, etc. that we hadn't talked of. He answered anything I ever asked but of course if I didn't know to ask it, it didn't necessarily come up.

Sealing is foreign to me and it is wrong, short of what in most states are some pretty strict criteria and reasons for such.
 
Of course much hasn't hit the record other than by defense as prosecution has only shared what has been necessary for probable cause and so on.
 
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.
And I don't see any such thing. Sorry, just hitting a few I never got through entirely. There is not any full context of ANYthing and ONE side's filing is all. As always it seems to me. With selective bis in it as always.

Both examples and things both your and Tresir posted and what we all also know is a whole lot goes into what constitutes requiring a Miranda and there is also the 14 day rule. This is all far from clear yet. Arresting him after in no way means he could not have stormed out of that room either. WHATever type of room, interview or lounge or interrogation, is it this or is it that, yada, yada.

He KNEW his rights from the first time, not saying that should be the deciding factor but he did, and again there is the 14 day thing. Being taken into custody later means nothing.

There is a whole lot that matters in such and most of it we don't know the answers too. Imo.
 
What about the 14 day thing? Or is that not valid for some reason?

@Olenna ditto
No one knows imo. Talking heads I've heard says it IS valid. AND that BOTH were noncustodial. YOu posted one yourself I watched. I haen't seen one but would about guarantee other talking heads or worthless channels are saying otherwise yet actually it's pretty quiet on this case since the whole leak thing and contempt thing and even prior somewhat...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,368
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom