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:
Additional comment I have on this now I have thought more about it.

These guys have history for trying to get rid of her before just because she called them out on their faulty security of evidence, so it looks like sour grapes on their part and that they are being vindictive. We shall see. It will be good in one way to see ISC deal with it so the accusation of bias can be resolved. She wouldn't want that in her record IMO.

I don't understand what your point is about Diener. Did he recuse for a similar reason? Not sure we know do we?
I'm out of order here, the site has me here and I should be back catching up with a bit older ones but Iin doing so found myself on this page did read some of the ones you are responding to like her yesterday during work breaks though and just jumping in to say yeah whatever the Diener remark is made no sense and was cryptic/vague but I gather it was meant to be.
 
Nice of them to give her some outs but I think she will let it go to the Supreme Court again. I may be wrong though, so let's wait and see.
She won't go there imo unless they "take" her there. But yes, I agree. They are burning the supporters they had to a point or gained or RA did out from what I am seeing out there and losing them as more see they are not doing their job and this most new obvious round of not being prepared has the ones that were giving the benefit of the doubt, and a fair shale to them, done with it. I say give they themselves a month in front of a jury lol, jury will have had it within two weeks and see through it.

It is absolutely AMAZING THE LACK out there that used to be I guess fed from this very conduit the defense had before THAT leak and the suicide. NOTABLE. No one wants to be TIED to them apparently or have it all found. It was far different beforehand...
 
She won't go there imo unless they "take" her there. But yes, I agree. They are burning the supporters they had to a point or gained or RA did out from what I am seeing out there and losing them as more see they are not doing their job and this most new obvious round of not being prepared has the ones that were giving the benefit of the doubt, and a fair shale to them, done with it. I say give they themselves a month in front of a jury lol, jury will have had it within two weeks and see through it.

It is absolutely AMAZING THE LACK out there that used to be I guess fed from this very conduit the defense had before THAT leak and the suicide. NOTABLE. No one wants to be TIED to them apparently or have it all found. It was far different beforehand...
We also have this BS with the "state actor" ie the MH specialist who interviewed him at Westville and doesn't want to give any more answers, so has lawyered up while she is busy scrubbing her SM presence as fast as she can. WTH is that all about and why is it the D interviewing her anyway? Shouldn't it be LE? What if he has admitted other crimes to her?

Did you get to watch Tom? What was his take on it? Maybe I missed your response.
 
Last edited:
Order from the Court
-
advising that the hearings May 21-23 are cancelled due to Defendant's 2nd Verified Motion for Disqualification of Judge ...

1716229561673.png
 
Order from the Court
-
advising that the hearings May 21-23 are cancelled due to Defendant's 2nd Verified Motion for Disqualification of Judge ...

View attachment 22082
Sounds like she's going to review and rule on it so I don't think she would waste time on that if she was going to recuse herself.
Not surprised she cancelled everything that was scheduled on the 21-23rd to deal with it.
 
Special Judge Fran Gull has canceled the pretrial evidence hearings that were scheduled to begin this week in the high-profile Delphi murders case.


The hearings were meant to address several pivotal motions including the possibility of barring certain evidence from being presented during the trial — which is currently scheduled to begin in October.


Last week, Richard Allen’s defense team asked Gull to postpone the hearings as they pushed for more time to depose a psychologist assigned to Allen during his stint at Westville Correctional Facility. Allen is accused of murdering teen girls Abby Williams and Libby German in Delphi in February 2017.


Delphi defense team asks for pretrial evidence hearings to be delayed, judge says no

Gull initially denied the defense team’s request to push back the pretrial hearings, which were scheduled to begin on Tuesday, before suddenly reversing course on Monday and canceling the pretrial hearings outright.
 
Not sure if this has been posted. Am losing track of all the motions TBH. This one mentions some new phone data brought up by P just last week. Interesting. Paragraphs 5 and 6 refer to phone data provided by Sergeant Cecil. I believe this is data regarding Kline, as Cecil is the officer who dealt with that issue. ie KK cyber crimes.

So finally we see evidence of the K connection. This has come out just a week before the trial was to begin.

 
Last edited:
Not sure if this has been posted. Am losing track of all the motions TBH. This one mentions some new phone data brought up by P just last week. Interesting. Paragraphs 5 and 6 refer to phone data provided by Sergeant Cecil. I believe this is data regarding Kline, as Cecil is the officer who dealt with that issue. ie KK cyber crimes.

So finally we see evidence of the K connection. This has come out just a week before the trial was to begin.



Do you see how the prosecution is holding evidence back from the defense, now?
 
Do you see how the prosecution is holding evidence back from the defense, now?
I don't see it as that because this is evidence from another person's trial in another jurisdiction. How does that come under Carroll County jurisdiction exactly?

Up until now we have been led to believe KK had nothing to do with RA so we still don't know anything ATM. KK is also appealing I believe, so that may affect the rules too. You are too willing to jump to wrong conclusions. How is this proof in your mind?
 
I don't see it as that because this is evidence from another person's trial in another jurisdiction. How does that come under Carroll County jurisdiction exactly?

Up until now we have been led to believe KK had nothing to do with RA so we still don't know anything ATM. KK is also appealing I believe, so that may affect the rules too. You are too willing to jump to wrong conclusions. How is this proof in your mind?

It came one week before the trial was supposed to start. I find it hard to believe the prosecuter just found out about this.
 
It came one week before the trial was supposed to start. I find it hard to believe the prosecuter just found out about this.
Ok so it is opinion and you don't actually know this. He would have to subpoena it for the witness to testify so he probably did that as the trial was supposed to be this week. Everybody knows about KK so even the defence should have requested this themselves as a possible defence anyway but they are still wasting theiir time on a stupid viking defence. Have the D actually got any geofence data for the Odinists that they say committed the crime? Have they turned that over to the court and the P? I bet you they haven't. They only want to attack the P and the judge instead of defending their client
 
Last edited:
Ok so it is opinion and you don't actually know this. He would have to subpoena it for the witness to testify so he probably did that as the trial was supposed to be this week. Everybody knows about KK so even the defence should have requested this themselves as a possible defence anyway but they are still wasting theiir time on a stupid viking defence. Have the D actually got any geofence data for the Odinists that they say committed the crime? Have they turned that over to the court and the P? I bet you they haven't.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the defense doesn't have to give the prosecution anything.
 
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the defense doesn't have to give the prosecution anything.
Well if they want a reason to get their client out of jail and have proof, they would. They did it with the 100+ pages F memo so why not with the KK theory too, which is much more feasible?

This is all out there about KK for anyone to read. Link to article below and second link to KKs 34 page PC. I am not going through it as I will wait for trial and hear the witnesses then.



Link to PC pdf is below for anyone who wants to gen up on it. There is also a link within the article above about Anthony Shots.

 
Last edited:
Not sure if this has been posted. Am losing track of all the motions TBH. This one mentions some new phone data brought up by P just last week. Interesting. Paragraphs 5 and 6 refer to phone data provided by Sergeant Cecil. I believe this is data regarding Kline, as Cecil is the officer who dealt with that issue. ie KK cyber crimes.

So finally we see evidence of the K connection. This has come out just a week before the trial was to begin.



Might help to have the context of the 5/20 motion that mentions Sgt. Cecil.

This 5/20 motion is the 3rd motion related to the D's original "Motion to Continue all Matters" filed on 5/17/24. The P then countered this motion to continue all matters on 5/20. Also on 5/20, The D countered the P's counter. That's the Motion you've linked. For more context as to the phone data discovery the D received from the P on 5/15/24 , we can reference the D's original motion from 5/17/24:

Motion to Continue All Hearings

It appears the "witness" making the "extraction report" for the Defense is mentioned in the D's original Motion to Continue All Matters - see below clip from that motion - in #13 below. (I think this "witness" from 5/17 = "Cecil" mentioned 5/20?)

The name Cecil is not used here on 5/17. But on 5/20, the witness providing the report of findings for the D appears to be named as Sgt. Cecil. Earlier, the P filed a Motion in Limine on 4/29 where #11 listed names of 3rd party suspects that the P asks the Court to disallow/rule out from the P's defense (SODDI defense). On 5/17, the Defense indicates they will use the 5/15-received phone extraction and the evidence witness' related report to argue against that list. IMO, the D states it believes the 5/15-received phone extraction has evidence that supports a 3rd party suspect (SODDI) the Defense wishes to argue. IMO, the phone extraction witness providing the report was revealed in 5/20 as being Cecil.

11.The defense received possession of that new phone extraction less than week before the motion
in limine hearing was set and needs more time to review the phone extraction data.

12.Based upon quick review of the phone extraction, It is likely that the
defense will use the new phone extraction as part of its evidentiary
presentation arguing against the prosecution's motion in limine to not
discuss third party suspects as it appears that the new phone
extraction provides favorable evidence for the defense; but the defense
needs additional time to review the entire phone extraction in order to
be prepared to argue against the prosecution's motion in limine.

13.Additionally, the witness who extracted the phone data last weekend
has indicated that he will be issuing report on his findings as well as
investigating matters identified by the defense that the defense
believes provide important information concerning third-party suspects.

14.The defense would therefore request that at minimum, the hearing
on the motion in limine be rescheduled until after the aforementioned
report is filed as it would be judicially economical to hear all the
evidence for the motion in limine at one time in one hearing and would
additionally prevent the Court from prejudging the evidence presented
until all the evidence can be presented at the same time in the same
hearing.

FYI - Here are the names on the Prosecutions' Motion in Limine dated 4/29/24 (see #7) as to "these names can't be used as a SODDI" by the Defense. Both the Klines are on the Prosecution's "not-allowed" into evidence.

Adobe Acrobat

7. Any attempt to introduce evidence of 3rd party motive that is not relevant and/or the probative value is outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues or has the potential to mislead the jury in violation of Rule 401. Lashbrook v. State, 762 N.E.2d 756 (Ind. 2002); Pelley v. State, 901 N.E.2d 494 (2009). Before any such evidence may be permitted the Defense must show some connection between the 3rd party and the crime. Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006). Further it must be a direct connection based on admissible evidence and not founded in hearsay, speculation, rumors, conjecture or theory. Mcintyre v. State, 717 N.E.2d 114 (1999); McGaha v. State, 926 N.E.2d 1050 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010); Tibbs v. State, 59 N.E.3d 1005 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). The State requests such Order in Limine to include but not be limited to the following:
a. Odinism
b. Cult or ritualistic killing
c. Brad Holder
d. Patrick Westfall
e. Johnny Messer
f. Elvis Fields
g. Ned Smith
h. Rod Abrahms
i. Kegan Kline
j. Jerry Kline
k. Ron Logan

JMO, it appears the Prosecution expects this list of names to be possible names the Defense will attempt to bring into the case as possible 3rd party suspects. (And with this Motion in Limine the Prosecution requests the Court Order these names off base as to trial evidence.)

(I take this as meaning the Prosecution has ruled out those names on the list in this matter (names including KK and BH), and motions the court to keep any evidence related to these names out of trial evidence. jmo)

We've yet to learn who's phone is the subject of Cecil's witness report. Likely it's someone(s) on the Prosecution's Motion in Limine ruled-out suspects, or the "no SODDI" list in #7 above.

And, most recently, in the 2nd Motion to Dismiss, also dated 5/20 - the same date as the D's motion to continue that reveals the Sgt. Cecil name as defense fact witness - the Defense specifically named 3rd party suspect BH.

So ... I wanted to ask here - were there any links between BH and KK explored in the past? (asking b/c kk investigation was b/4 my time).

And ... if Sgt. Cecil is examining phone extraction info and reporting on it for the Defense ... is the only phone extraction Cecil would be examining related to KK?

JMHO
 
Last edited:
Might help to have the context of the 5/20 motion that mentions Sgt. Cecil.

This 5/20 motion is the 3rd motion related to the D's original "Motion to Continue all Matters" filed on 5/17/24. The P then countered this motion to continue all matters on 5/20. Also on 5/20, The D countered the P's counter. That's the Motion you've linked. For more context as to the phone data discovery the D received from the P on 5/15/24 , we can reference the D's original motion from 5/17/24:

Motion to Continue All Hearings

It appears the "witness" making the "extraction report" for the Defense is mentioned in the D's original Motion to Continue All Matters - see below clip from that motion - in #13 below. (I think this "witness" from 5/17 = "Cecil" mentioned 5/20?)

The name Cecil is not used here on 5/17. But on 5/20, the witness providing the report of findings for the D appears to be named as Sgt. Cecil. Earlier, the P filed a Motion in Limine on 4/29 where #11 listed names of 3rd party suspects that the P asks the Court to disallow/rule out from the P's defense (SODDI defense). On 5/17, the Defense indicates they will use the 5/15-received phone extraction and the evidence witness' related report to argue against that list. IMO, the D states it believes the 5/15-received phone extraction has evidence that supports a 3rd party suspect (SODDI) the Defense wishes to argue. IMO, the phone extraction witness providing the report was revealed in 5/20 as being Cecil.



FYI - Here are the names on the Prosecutions' Motion in Limine dated 4/29/24 (see #7) as to "these names can't be used as a SODDI" by the Defense. Both the Klines are on the Prosecution's "not-allowed" into evidence.

Adobe Acrobat




JMO, it appears the Prosecution expects this list of names to be possible names the Defense will attempt to bring into the case as possible 3rd party suspects. (And with this Motion in Limine the Prosecution requests the Court Order these names off base as to trial evidence.)

(I take this as meaning the Prosecution has ruled out those names on the list in this matter (names including KK and BH), and motions the court to keep any evidence related to these names out of trial evidence. jmo)

We've yet to learn who's phone is the subject of Cecil's witness report. Likely it's someone(s) on the Prosecution's Motion in Limine ruled-out suspects, or the "no SODDI" list in #7 above.

And, most recently, in the 2nd Motion to Dismiss, also dated 5/20 - the same date as the D's motion to continue that reveals the Sgt. Cecil name as defense fact witness - the Defense specifically named 3rd party suspect BH.

So ... I wanted to ask here - were there any links between BH and KK explored in the past? (asking b/c kk investigation was b/4 my time).

And ... if Sgt. Cecil is examining phone extraction info and reporting on it for the Defense ... is the only phone extraction Cecil would be examining related to KK?

JMHO
Answering your questions at the end. No links explored between KK and BH AFAIK except BH's son dated Abby and KK catfished and arranged to meet Libby the night before/early morning of the day of the murders.

Phone extractions - don't know/haven't seen the answer. KK had numerous phones. Guess we have to wait for October now.

Thanks for the context. It is a little clearer now. BTW Sergeant Cecil is now Asst Commander Cecil of the ISP Cyber Crime Unit as I understand it.

This was his announcement in 2020.

 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,249
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom