re: Delphi, IN Murders Trial Thread

Gag order is in place until sentencing (before Christmas)

quote:

---

Gag order is in place until sentencing (before Christmas)

---

Dec 20th is sentencing. I have no idea if they can gag the jury.

quote:

---

The judge can decide if the sentences are to be served consecutively or concurrently.

---

I’d imagine consecutively. Since no death penalty, I’m sure he’ll get the max possible. Even if the judge has doubts or has problems with the prosecution’s case, the fact is 12 jurors of his peers found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of slashing the throats and evilly murdering a 13 year old girl and 14 year old girl that were complete strangers to him (so “passion” is not any sort of mitigating factor).

I mean, if that doesn’t deserve the absolute maximum sentence, what does. At his age, he’s almost guaranteed to die in prison regardless, but still, the sentence is a symbol.

I said earlier that it seemed like the defense was putting on an “insanity” defense more than a “he didn’t do it defense.” I wonder if he ever gets granted a new trial via appeal, if they will change their strategy and plead “not guilty by reason of insanity.”

quote:

---

There is no evidence that he was "insane" at the time of the murders

---

That’s because they didn’t argue that. They could easily find an “expert” to say he’s been bat-shite crazy since before the murders—he did have a history of mental health issues, though not “psychosis.”

quote:

---

They won't be able to plead that.

---

They could. I’m not saying it would be a winning strategy, but the “it wasn’t me” proved to not be one today.

quote:

---

I think you're confusing that with no competent to stand trial which only prolongs when trial could take place. He'd be in jail the whole time regardless.

---

No, I understand the difference. And I’m not predicting the defense will do that or suggesting they should, just wondering if they might think that’s their best defense if the time ever arises. Without having witnessed the trial since no cameras and just going off what was reported and my own common sense, I had a hard time buying the “I confessed—61 times—because jail made me crazy.” I think I’d be more open to an argument that “I’ve always been batshit crazy.” Or even temporarily. One of the girls was wearing a tie-dyed shirt just like his daughter had—there’s a pic off her in the same shirt with the same body type. Maybe he had a contemptuous relationship with his daughter and seeing Libby set him off.

Of course I don’t believe that, but they’re gonna have to throw a Hail Mary if he ever gets a new trial. The “I wasn’t Bridge Guy” Hail Mary wasn’t very compelling. Obviously. I think he could have been convicted without any confessions at all. Besides the one where he said he was there at the exact same time as the girls wearing the exact same clothes as “Bridge Guy.”

quote:

---

You would convict him without any of the confessions? That’s a scary thought

---

In fairness, confessions aside, there was some fairly compelling circumstantial and physical evidence that made it very reasonable to believe he killed those girls.

Most of the below is based on the logical inference that “Bridge Guy” killed the girls:

-Allen was admittedly at the scene of the abduction. He changed his timeline later, but there’s surveillance footage from the feed store, I believe, that disputes his updated timeline. It shows what appears to be his vehicle leaving the area after the SnapChat footage was taken and the murders were believed to have taken place.

-Allen was wearing exactly what “Bridge Guy” was wearing in the video.

-A prosecution witness testified the voice from the SnapChat footage was Richard Allen’s. I’ve heard a few reports from people who attended the hearings that said the voice was incredibly similar to Allen’s voice, which may have also pulled some weight with jurors.

-One of the girls mentioned a gun in the SnapChat footage, and there was also reported to have been a sound that appeared to have been a cocking gun in the video as well.

-Ballistic experts testified the tool markings on the .40 round found at the murder scene were consistent with those made by rounds cycled through Allen’s .40 firearm.

-A witness testified that she saw a muddy, bloody man matching Bridge Guy’s general description walking along the road near the murder scene around the time of the murder.

So, we know what the murderer was wearing. We also know he brandished a .40 caliber handgun and left an unspent round at the crime scene. Allen is unquestionably there. He’s wearing the same clothes as the perp. His voice sounds like the perp’s. Oh, and he owns a .40 caliber handgun that produced tool markings on a casing that match the ones on the unspent round at the scene.

To me, it’s quite reasonable to conclude Allen is the perp, even without the confessions.

quote:

---

Could someone else have not been there and just not admitted to being there?

---

Is it possible? Sure. Given even the few details above, is it reasonable to think that’s what happened? I don’t believe so, no.

quote:

---

Is it possible? Sure. Given even the few details above, is it reasonable to think that’s what happened? I don’t believe so, no.

---

Everything you said. But also, if another man were there, Allen would have had to have seen based on where he—and the 3 witnesses who passed him according to them AND Richard Allen—passed tech other. Surely, if there were another man out there wearing anything close to what I was wearing, that would have been the one of the main things mentioned to the police. “Hey, I was there and on the bridge at this time, but so was this other dude dressed in similar clothing. So that picture you’ve guys got must have been him, cause it ain’t me.”

He called the tip line and put himself at the scene the day AFTER the Bridge Guy photo (the still from the video) was released. Because he knew that was him and was trying to get out in front of it since he knew that group of girls passed him. And he had a public facing job at CVS. He was scared one of those would walk in one day and see him—maybe he hands them their medicine—and recognizes him and calls the police. “Hey, the guy I saw out on the trails the day of the murder that I told y’all about, just handed me my medicine at CVS.”

He didn’t know how good of a look they got of him. He saw himself and panicked, knowing if he DIDN’T call in and admit to being there, it’d look way worse and call more attention to himself if somebody else placed him there. Turns out they didn’t pay enough attention to give a good enough description for a sketch. But he had no way of knowing that. Or if there was another, clearer pic somebody took that showed his face. He gambled and wound up fricking himself. If he hadn’t ever called that tip line, he’d still be free. He played himself.

I don’t understand the double jeopardy that you mention. Two charges were kidnapping and two were murder. If double jeopardy, did the defense bring that up? I don’t see it.

Guilty, curious to see if they sentence him to death with the little physical evidence.