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:
Not a problem for me. All I do is look for new posts and so I'd think a new one would bring me to the right forum. One would think. No time to keep up with all the other.

I also know how to search for a case.

However, notk sure why it is going to courtroom yet since it remains to be seen if it will end up in one on time and on track.
Yes I usually just pull up my history to view threads so it should take me to the posts whichever forum they are in.
 
IMO, it's interesting that Barb McD continues to connect Judge Diener's 7-day-notice to the Delphi case.
Loretta Rush, referenced in the resignation Diener letter, is the Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court.
(The Indiana Supreme Court reviews cases referred to them by the Indiana Office of Judicial and Attorney Regulation and determines sanctions if any. )
Judicial disciplinary process

jmho






 
I did notice it was signed on the 28th, which is the day they said he was arrested in the PC on the 31st. So it still doesn't show he was arrested on the 26th, which is supposedly when he was handcuffed, so it is still pretty confusing as to where he was from the 26th to the 28th.
I posted a press release from ISP awhile back explaining all this. Do you want me to bump it for you?
 
IMO, it's interesting that Barb McD continues to connect Judge Diener's 7-day-notice to the Delphi case.
Loretta Rush, referenced in the resignation Diener letter, is the Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court.
(The Indiana Supreme Court reviews cases referred to them by the Indiana Office of Judicial and Attorney Regulation and determines sanctions if any. )
Judicial disciplinary process

jmho







What has the judicial disciplinary process got to do with Diener's resignation? Are you suspecting something peculiar here?
 
You can breathe a sigh of relief 😌

Once again, proof he was taken into custody on the 26th and taken to Carroll County jail. I know I offend some with my refusal to watch YT videos. :) The point is, I've said all along, and so has @Olenna , what is the correct info. It matters because frankly we both get a lot of shade thrown at us for seeking factual info. I'm highly into facts. I'm okay with shade, too. :)


Press release copied in full:


Arrest Made for the Murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German


Carroll County – After an extensive investigation, the Delphi Double Homicide Task Force made an arrest for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.

On February 13, 2017, Abigail Williams and Liberty German were tragically murdered while visiting the Monon High Bridge in Delphi, IN. Shortly after, the Indiana State Police and Carroll County Sheriff’s office created the Delphi Double Homicide Task Force, which encompassed federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. This task force has worked diligently the last five and a half years to ensure this horrendous crime did not go unsolved.

On Wednesday, October 26, 2022, detectives with the Delphi Double Homicide Task Force took Richard Allen, 50, from Delphi Indiana into custody at the Indiana State Police Lafayette Post for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German. Allen was transported to Carroll County Jail, where he was being held.

On Friday, October 28, 2022, Allen was formally charged with two counts of murder and transported to the White County Jail, where he is currently being held without bond.

We would like to thank everyone who was involved throughout this investigation, which included the Indiana State Police, Carroll County Sheriff’s Office, Delphi Police Department, Carroll County Prosecutor’s office, United States Marshals Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and numerous other federal and local agencies. These agencies have invested countless hours and resources into this investigation.

This is an active and ongoing investigation. There is no further information to release at this time.

*All criminal defendants are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

-30-

If anyone doesn't want to accept the word of the ISP as well, I dunno 🙃 what to tell you.
@Tresir
 
What has the judicial disciplinary process got to do with Diener's resignation? Are you suspecting something peculiar here?
I want to label this as speculation as to what appears to be "peculiar", as you say.

There's other journalists following this story now:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/original-judge-on-delphi-murders-case-abruptly-resigns-ahead-of-running-for-re-election/ar-AA1o37js

The original judge on the Delphi murders case stepped down this week with just a few days notice.

Carroll County Circuit Court Judge Benjamin Diener’s last day was Tuesday, April 30.

He is currently on the ballot for the May 7 primary, running for re-election as the county’s Circuit Court judge.

I'm curious with Barb McD's focus here for 2 days. That's peculiar. She (surely) has official sources, and her sources don't need to be on record when they suggest to Barb what she can look for and run down. Her computer screen shot ... is that easy to find w/o some direction?

The Diener resignation is super abrupt. A 7 day notice from Diener (young guy) who clearly had other plans when he put himself on the ballot for this week's re-election ... is also .. peculiar. He's on the ballot. But he's now suddenly not running.

Don't know if copying Chief Justice Rush on the notice is peculiar or standard procedure. Also makes me wonder ... has Diener wound up on a witness list for the RA trial re: early days? Or were there process issues with his early handling of this case? And I recalled that the IN Chief Justice runs the Judicial Oversight Board for the state of IN. (thus the link - refreshing my memory.)

IIRC, Diener, as a young inexperienced newly elected Judge oversaw and approved and made early "process irregularities/mistakes" with RA's case such as: sealing charging documents from public access against IN rules, characterizing press inquiries on same as "bloodlust", holding charging hearing for RA b/4 he had engaged a lawyer, sending RA to prison before he had representation ... to name some old issues raised early days.

Diener abruptly recused after all sorts of criticism; just walked away from the case. I've wondered if he wasn't (then) referred to higher review powers, for his judicial over-see-ers to review/intervene for these early missteps. (Is that where/when/how/why the Special Judge was pulled in?)

Not to mention ... if I'm a journalist not getting answers from Diener or the P or LE on process, I'd complain higher up the chain...maybe having my journalist-lawyer do same... They'd go to the judicial oversight board.

JMHO
 
I want to label this as speculation as to what appears to be "peculiar", as you say.

There's other journalists following this story now:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/original-judge-on-delphi-murders-case-abruptly-resigns-ahead-of-running-for-re-election/ar-AA1o37js



I'm curious with Barb McD's focus here for 2 days. That's peculiar. She (surely) has official sources, and her sources don't need to be on record when they suggest to Barb what she can look for and run down. Her computer screen shot ... is that easy to find w/o some direction?

The Diener resignation is super abrupt. A 7 day notice from Diener (young guy) who clearly had other plans when he put himself on the ballot for this week's re-election ... is also .. peculiar. He's on the ballot. But he's now suddenly not running.

Don't know if copying Chief Justice Rush on the notice is peculiar or standard procedure. Also makes me wonder ... has Diener wound up on a witness list for the RA trial re: early days? Or were there process issues with his early handling of this case? And I recalled that the IN Chief Justice runs the Judicial Oversight Board for the state of IN. (thus the link - refreshing my memory.)

IIRC, Diener, as a young inexperienced newly elected Judge oversaw and approved and made early "process irregularities/mistakes" with RA's case such as: sealing charging documents from public access against IN rules, characterizing press inquiries on same as "bloodlust", holding charging hearing for RA b/4 he had engaged a lawyer, sending RA to prison before he had representation ... to name some old issues raised early days.

Diener abruptly recused after all sorts of criticism; just walked away from the case. I've wondered if he wasn't (then) referred to higher review powers, for his judicial over-see-ers to review/intervene for these early missteps. (Is that where/when/how/why the Special Judge was pulled in?)

Not to mention ... if I'm a journalist not getting answers from Diener or the P or LE on process, I'd complain higher up the chain...maybe having my journalist-lawyer do same... They'd go to the judicial oversight board.

JMHO
Thank you.
 
I want to label this as speculation as to what appears to be "peculiar", as you say.

There's other journalists following this story now:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/original-judge-on-delphi-murders-case-abruptly-resigns-ahead-of-running-for-re-election/ar-AA1o37js



I'm curious with Barb McD's focus here for 2 days. That's peculiar. She (surely) has official sources, and her sources don't need to be on record when they suggest to Barb what she can look for and run down. Her computer screen shot ... is that easy to find w/o some direction?

The Diener resignation is super abrupt. A 7 day notice from Diener (young guy) who clearly had other plans when he put himself on the ballot for this week's re-election ... is also .. peculiar. He's on the ballot. But he's now suddenly not running.

Don't know if copying Chief Justice Rush on the notice is peculiar or standard procedure. Also makes me wonder ... has Diener wound up on a witness list for the RA trial re: early days? Or were there process issues with his early handling of this case? And I recalled that the IN Chief Justice runs the Judicial Oversight Board for the state of IN. (thus the link - refreshing my memory.)

IIRC, Diener, as a young inexperienced newly elected Judge oversaw and approved and made early "process irregularities/mistakes" with RA's case such as: sealing charging documents from public access against IN rules, characterizing press inquiries on same as "bloodlust", holding charging hearing for RA b/4 he had engaged a lawyer, sending RA to prison before he had representation ... to name some old issues raised early days.

Diener abruptly recused after all sorts of criticism; just walked away from the case. I've wondered if he wasn't (then) referred to higher review powers, for his judicial over-see-ers to review/intervene for these early missteps. (Is that where/when/how/why the Special Judge was pulled in?)

Not to mention ... if I'm a journalist not getting answers from Diener or the P or LE on process, I'd complain higher up the chain...maybe having my journalist-lawyer do same... They'd go to the judicial oversight board.

JMHO
He'd been a judge for 10 years though by the time RA hit the radar.

 
Ok - it was the previous judge that requested Allen be sent to DOC due to concerns he would harm himself, or others would harm him. He recused himself due to safety concerns for himself and his family, reading this article.

Makes me understand more why they won't move him back without the court saying so.

Bumping - re Diener recusal.
 
He'd been a judge for 10 years though by the time RA hit the radar.

ah right. it was 5 years b/4 the delphi murders and the case beginning. Read too fast. Thank you. And of course Diener did approve the early investigative stuff - RL for example.
 
Last edited:
Bumping - re Diener recusal.
From the article:
Diener recused himself after issuing a strongly worded and scathing order to move Allen from wherever he is currently being held to the Indiana Department of Corrections (DOC). The court’s refusal to provide information about the case makes it difficult to understand exactly where the prisoner is being held.

FWIW: As I recall from the past ... this move to IDOC - was during the earliest days b/4 RA had representation. JMHO
 
Last edited:
Wow. Well this one is signed at least by R lol. No clerk stamp yet. I can't blame IDOC for wanting a ton in writing about maintaining info and securing it with the leaky negligent nature of the defense. I'm underwhelmed. I guess just used to the same old and put little store in much nor fall for it until I see it adopted, filed, ordered, etc.
 
Looks like the "protection" is over certain information about IDOC employees that IDOC has agreed to provide the Defense. Looks like information is to be protected - through pre-trial, trial, any appeal, and any settlement following appeal. JMHO

Adobe Acrobat
It looks to me if this is truly agreed to that IDOC is happily providing what is likely requested or subpoenaed but with the intent of securing SSNs, home addresses and any other doxing info no? Just as Diener worried about and just as the type of care that is taken with juror's info in cases, etc. as well. Of course all a bit cryptic for us, Joe Public, like always.
 
I did notice it was signed on the 28th, which is the day they said he was arrested in the PC on the 31st. So it still doesn't show he was arrested on the 26th, which is supposedly when he was handcuffed, so it is still pretty confusing as to where he was from the 26th to the 28th.
Yeah I don't disagree but I gave it up and went with the agency press release because either it is the truth or if it is not, then that's another can of worms. I don't think it is all that unusual to anticipated arrest, do the arrest at whatever point, move, book, charge, arraign over a couple of days. To me that blank document was prepared in anticipation and provided.

I wondered at first but I honestly don't think there is anything with this to get hung up on nor worried about. At first it was hard to determine and custody and dates were kind of up in the air. I'm satisfied with the LE site statement back then. If we had had that first, it would have prevented a lot of the back and forth on it.

Imo it is kind of a moot point now anyone and always was. I don't think this interview and questioning is going to be thrown out as I don't think anything wrong went on. Never seemed like it to me to begin with and seems to have planned out to be the case. Of course we don't know all but now that both claims and responses are in, it is about what I would have guessed. He was there willingly and knew his rights, and was reminded if not.
 
I managed to copy pasta it to make it easier to read. Plus formatting the paragraphs.

MOTION TO ENTER STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

The Indiana Department of Correction, a non-party, by counsel, and Richard Allen, by counsel, respectfully submit these terms to the Court and request the Court to enter a protective order adopting its stipulations.
BACKGROUND

1. OnApril 15, 2024, Richard Allen served a subpoena deuces tecum on the Indiana Department ofCorrection seeking certain employment information.

2. The Indiana Department of Correction and Richard Allen, by counsel, have agreed to narrow the request in the subpoena.

3. The Department of Correction seeks both to comply with the request and to protect itselffrom annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense as described in Indiana Trial Rule 26(0). STIPULATIONS

4. The Department of Correction shall provide to Mr. Allen, by counsel, the information sought in its narrowed request within one business day ofthe Court's order entering a protective order. The Department of Correction shall 1provide the information to counsel for Mr. Allen With redactions over Whole or partial social security numbers and over home addresses and home telephone numbers.

5. Counsel for Mr. Allen shall share the Department's response with the prosecution as prescribed by Indiana Trial Rule 34(C)(4) within one business day of receipt.

6. The materials provided by the Department may be used solely for the preparation, trial, and any appeal ofthis action, as well as related settlement negotiations, and for no other purpose, without the written consent ofthe Department. The information contained in the response may not be disclosed to any person except in accordance with the terms ofthis agreement or as otherwise provided by law. All persons in possession ofthe responsive information agree to exercise reasonable care with regard to the custody, use, or storage of such information. Any use or disclosure ofthe Department's response in violation ofthe terms ofthis agreement may subject the disclosing person or party to sanctions.

7. All persons subject to this stipulation agree that the information provided by the Department may only be accessed or reviewed by the following: a. The Court, its personnel, and court reporters; b. Counsel ofrecord for any party in this action and their employees who assist counsel ofrecord in this action and are informed ofthe duties hereunder; c. The parties, including their agents and employees who are assisting or have reason to know ofthis action; 2d. Experts or consultants employed by the parties or their counsel for purposes ofthis action, so long as each such expert or consultant agrees to be bound to these terms; and e. Other Witnesses 0r persons With the Department's consent or by court order.

8. Nothing in this agreement restricts a party's ability to disclose the information and materials provided by the Department during the course ofthe trial of this cause.

9. The parties shall not disseminate the information or materials provided by the Department in any pre-trial extrajudicial statement by means of public communication.

10. The stipulations contained in paragraphs 6 9 shall govern any future document requests submitted to the Department by Mr. Allen in this cause. WHEREFORE, the non-party Department of Correction respectfully requests the Court enter a protective order protecting the Department's subpoena response.

Respectfully submitt THEODORE E. ROKITA Attorney General ofIndiana Attorney No. 18857-49 /s/ Bridle)!
Rozzi, "3365- 9 H S, IL , ROZZI&DEAN Logansp y, By: /s/Aaron M Ridlen N 46947 Attorney for Defendant Aaron M. Ridlen Deputy Attorney Genera Attorney No. 31481-49 OFFICE 0F INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA



Comment added by me -
So they will provide the IDOC employee info requested with SSNs partly or fully redacted and noone can see this info except the parties, especially not for us Joe Public to see. So not for us plebs to worry about at all.
Lol. Mime. Just said much the same. Even used "Joe Public" LMAO. I suspect this relates to the guards or some such? It sure doesn't seem to be a protective order as first purported for RA.

It also has not as far as I can tell been adopted nor entered by the court yet.
 
It will be the same thread, just in a different location.
We're picking up the house and taking it with us.
Man I could use that kind of service. Could you pick up mine while you are at it and bring it here and drop it off? Thank you in advance. Would solve a LOT of things. = happy camper, big life issue solved.

I am not sold yet that this is going to go off on time to trial. Seems to be the case but see no reason to trust such in this case until we see it.
 
Yes I usually just pull up my history to view threads so it should take me to the posts whichever forum they are in.
Not sure on that one, we each use or own stuff I guess. I do new posts and if I was tired and already looked at them but didn't respond, etc. (meaning wont' show as new) I then do all posts which will give the ones of the last day or so and I go through them for the ones I want to remember in cases I know to go back to reply or read. My life is to the point notifications are just an ignore for me because I can't keep up. I just look for new info and new posts on cases I follow.
 
IMO, it's interesting that Barb McD continues to connect Judge Diener's 7-day-notice to the Delphi case.
Loretta Rush, referenced in the resignation Diener letter, is the Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court.
(The Indiana Supreme Court reviews cases referred to them by the Indiana Office of Judicial and Attorney Regulation and determines sanctions if any. )
Judicial disciplinary process

jmho







I have little liking for Barbies. Including this one. I don't like Barbie McDonald had a Farm and a Big Mac at the Golden Arch. I just don't. Call me biased. Can't stand her.

However, I find the last sentence interesting of trusting they will respond "appropriately" (odd wording imo) and his not keeping self available to serve or step in/fill in as a senior judge either. Who can blame him though. Cut loose for good. On the other hand he has seen what they've tried to do to Gull so who can blame him and where it may go or land from here as they continue to attempt all. There is justice and then unfortunately these days there are can anyone say it? P-O-L-I-T-I-C-S at the cost and price of justice.

And yes, he made some of the original decisions and rulings. Retiring is not going to remove him from that. So? I think he is more worried perhaps about having this case landing back in his lap? Anyone else think of that?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,343
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom