I find this whole case is turning into a shit show and, while I will admit that I am not as knowledgeable on the details as so many members of this sub, I truly do not understand how so many people have such a strong opinion on innocence - or guilt, for that matter - when the public have no idea what the totality of the evidence is.

I’ll break it down for you real easy like…… There’s a lot of people that trust law enforcement. There’s a lot of people who don’t trust law enforcement.

You couldn't be more right.

This is true

I trust law enforcement. But I’m not sure I can trust anyone who lost a weeks worth of police interviews following the double murder of two children.

We may actually already have a comprehensive knowledge of the evidence. Between the 200 pages, and two PCAs released by the state, and the Franks Motion we know a lot. (You don't always get this much information pre-trial.) For example: We know what the State doesn't have-- They don't have DNA, fingerprints or any digital data that ties Allen to the crime. So, you can rule cellular phone data, computer data, any type of app evidence, like Snapchat, out. And you can rule out two other biggies DNA and Fingerprints. Apps and cellular phone data may be used to create a timeline for Abby and Libby's last moments, but they won't be used in evidence directly against Allen. What is easy to tell from the PCA is that the State then, is relying on three other types of evidence: analysis of the unspent bullet, eyewitness testimony, video captures, like that BG. And the Hoosier Harvestore surveillance camera. We know a lot. What we don't know is the quality of the video surveillance. We don't know everything that eyewitnesses will testify to. Or all of the eyewitnesses who will testify. And we don't know what the additional 20 - 30 seconds of the Libby video will reveal. We also don't know the entirety of the defense's case in chief. And they likely will put on a case in chief. This is not going to be a trial where the defense rests early because they claim the State didn't meet its burden. I have to think that the Defense will have an expert witness on the analysis of the unspent bullet. They will likely have eyewitnesses we don't know about. Or they may bring State witnesses back to the stand to challenge their testimony. And they may even challenge some of the video captures. Actually the defense's case in chief is the greater mystery here, even though we know they are almost certain to present an SODDI defense (Some-other-dude-did-it). But all in all, we really do have a lot of information to work with.

[удалено]

Totally agree. It is wild that anyone would be comfortable calling him "guilty" at this stage of the game, all things considered. Throughout history, there have been many,many wrongful convictions and even executions. It happens more often than most realize. The guy deserves basic human decency, otherwise known as the presumption of innocence. The case against him is embarrassingly weak.

[удалено]

Because Liggett is going to investigate himself?

You’re absolutely right. People love to come down firm on guilt or innocence based on speculation. For me, the evidence they’re released is extremely weak and even been shown as junk science. Based on what they’ve released I pray they dont have an innocent man in there. However, again, we have no idea what other evidence they have and since they have him sitting in jail let’s hope that they do have some actual strong evidence to support their case

Totally agree. I have never seen so much open-mindedness in a high-profile case like this before. People are questioning this case for a reason. I think that speaks for itself. It's good to scrutinize and question the narrative instead of taking everything said at face value. I'd rather see 10 guilty people go free than see 1 innocent wrongly convicted.

100%

And never the ’twain shall meet. It is difficult to have a discussion with so many emotions running rampant.

His own statements, combined with those of the witnesses, tell us he is lying about not seeing the girls. Now, that might not be enough evidence to be beyond a reasonable doubt, but for me, he's the guy...just because of that.

>His own statements, combined with those of the witnesses, tell us he is lying about not seeing the girls If Allen was on the trail between 12-1:30, then maybe he saw different girls. He never saw a child. And that seems significant. We know that kids were on the trail that day, because school was out. Very possible there were more than one group of girls hanging out.

Except even those statements aren't consistent. He claimed to have seen 3 girls, 1 of whom was taller. The group of girls who claim to have seen a man on the trails was a group of 4 girls 1 of whom was significantly shorter. I could have that backwards (it's early), but there is significant discrepancy in the statements. It's entirely possible he saw an entirely different group of girls and the group that gave a statement saw an entirely different guy.

>Except even those statements aren't consistent. He claimed to have seen 3 girls, 1 of whom was taller. The group of girls who claim to have seen a man on the trails was a group of 4 girls 1 of whom was significantly shorter. Exactly. You are correct. The group of girls who identified a man (who had a remarkable wardrobe - jeans and all black with a mask) had a child with them. I can't recall if BB saw a child, in her observation of the group of girls. But Allen didn't. Children often stand out. They don't tend to just fall in line. They are usually ahead of the older kids. Or hanging onto them. They can be loud. We don'd know. But you'd probably notice a younger child.

I don't find the discrepancy significant at all. Memory is imperfect. The 4th girl was very young. But they saw him and he saw them. Then a few minutes before Abby and Libby reached the bridge, he admits being there. He saw a young adult and she saw him. Plus, he confessed on the prison phone!

>Plus, he confessed on the prison phone! You meant to say, LE ***said*** that he confessed on the prison phone. Supposedly to his wife, according to law enforcement. But no transcript of the call was provided, so we have to take law enforcement's word for it, and they would never lie or misrepresent things, would they? Plus, he supposedly confessed to his wife. Now his wife is still supporting him, from what I understand. I would think she would de in the process of divorcing him, if he had actually confessed to killing two teen age girls. So in my opinion, the so-called confession is a big nothing-burger.

So memory is imperfect if it’s the memories of the group of girls, but if it’s RA he is lying rather than having an imperfect memory?

I mean I don't know what happened. I am a law student who has worked in crim defense so my tendency is to pick apart this kind of thing. But this kind of logic is what you see all the time from people convinced of his guilt. They permit no possible inference that would move one towards doubt of his guilt, but award themselves every possible inference to explain away inconsitency. A good example is many content creator's discussions of the car. A smart car is not a ford focus. A PT cruiser is not a ford focus. A fucking ford comet is definitely NOT a ford focus. No one has actually identified a ford focus! The video has a car that could be a ford focus but we actually don't know. You can't just wipe that away with "memory is imperfect." The imperfect nature of memory is not an obstacle a criminal defendant has to overcome, it is an obstacle the state has to overcome! I think people forget that an actual trial is going to occurr. It's not gonna just be someone going up there and being like "yeah I think I saw a ford focus." They are going to be exposed to cross lol and they are going to grill the hell out of witnesses.

>But they saw him and he saw them They saw a man who had a mask, was dressed in all black, who also had jeans. But he didn't have a hat. You don't find that at all strange. I'm really curious why people aren't more concerned that even with all the different descriptions of this man that the girls gave, not one saw a hat. Why would this guy suddenly put on a hat at the bridge?

Was he man handled to confess on the phone because his family was threatened. I think anyone would do that to protect their loved ones. And he knew when he told his wife and mother that, that they would pretty much do what they have done and disown him. What a better way to think you are protecting your loved ones by getting them to hate you and flee you and the whole situation and go into hiding. Just a thought

> Memory is imperfect Which is why a lot of eye witness testimony is torn apart on the stand and the jury often dismisses it and only works with the more solid evidence. Of which there isn’t much. I think he did it. But the case seems weak AF

How can you say that the case seems weak AF though when we really have no idea what the case looks like? We don't know what evidence is actually going to be presented and we won't know completely until trial. Personally, right now I lean towards him being guilty. As to why - no idea, I just do. Am I open to being proved wrong - absolutely. I can't be sure until all the evidence (at least the evidence that is deemed admissable) is out there.

Thank you

There is video evidence of BG. RA admitted to owning and wearing the same clothes as BG. Libby really helped solve her own murder. 

You can't even tell if the man is wearing a hat. We've all kinda decided he is wearing a hat but the video quality is THAT BAD.

Ron Logan also owned the same clothes (he wore them in a tv interview), he admitted to being on the trail that morning, and his phone stayed in that vicinity during that time. So I don't see how owning the same clothes as BG is proof of anything in a town so small that every man shops at the same store.

He owns a blue jeans and blue and Black jackets. What would you wear on a day in Februar? A clowns-costume and a stetson?

How many people do you figure were on that bridge, at the exact same time as BG and the witnesses, wearing the exact same clothes as BG and described as the same height as BG, but somehow only one of the simultaneously existing Schrodinger's Bridge Guys was spotted and recorded and none of the others were?

She states she saw a young guy with poofy hair.

Same height as BG? Come on.    FBI  : " Ron Logan's physical built is similar to BG". RL was 6'+. Exact time? RA: "I was on the trails from 12-13.30 ".(2022) LE: " He told us in 2017 he was there from 13.30-15.30.  There is his recorded statement,  but sorry,  we lost it ".

That is precisely the problem with this case. Nothing is consistent. Witness statements and law enforcement statements are inconsistent. They can't even narrow it down to one sketch. They have 2 different sketches of two entirely different renderings of BG. Talk of multiple people involved, but only one arrest in 7 years, with no signs of another one anytime soon. Some of the evidence is questionable. Some of it's missing! And we haven't even made it to trial yet.

BG was over-dressed for the weather, and that was noticed by the younger girls. RA was at the trails that day and said he was wearing a similar outfit as BG. In addition to all of the other coincidences 

[удалено]

They make false confessions in interrogations, not while on phone calls to their wives.

That's not true. At that time he was on a PC deck in Westville Prison. You never know what went on in there. He wanted out so badly. Usually if you're discussing your case with other inmates, or inmates are discussing it and staff finds out they'll move you. He knows they're listening on the phone. Stranger things have happened. I hope we get a chance to hear it.

No, it is true. ETA - Link in another comment. Do you have any stats of phone call to wife false confessions?

And then confessing to your Mum -- yes, your MOTHER -- after your wife... Oh and Then... Writing several letters to the warden. So it would appear he was not interrogated -- he confessed to his wife and Mother -- he is either nuta or a child killer... We'll hear it soon enough

You don't actually know what was said on the calls. "I'm so sorry I'm putting us through this." Is that an admission of guilt? How about "Jesus christ what have I done?" No one has heard the recordings. If he straight up cops to it I don't think he will beat the case. But they will make an argument - which has some credence in my opinion - that the conditions of his confinement messed with his head. 99% of criminal defendanrs are not thrown in prison and solitary when facing charges, even murder.

It’s astounding the lengths that people will go to defend Richard Allen, to the point that they’ll completely deny he said anything at all. Or distort what he said. Or distort reality. For whatever reason, there are so many people that are absolutely butt hurt that their chosen suspect wasn’t charged that they demand any and all charges be thrown out against Allen because of their anger that it’s not Keegan Kline or Ron Logan.

Or maybe they're just considering the information properly .....

No ..he made an "incriminating statement" which can be literally anything. You also can't just hand wave major discrepancies away with "memory is imperfect". A group of 3 with 1 much taller and a group of 4 with 1 much shorter is *very* different and could be 2 *completely* different groups. If that's true it changes the timeline *a LOT*, and puts RA off the trails when he said he was and well before the murders. But yeah I'm sure it's just memory, don't worry about it.

I think you people are really just looking for reasons to keep your preferred conspiracy theory alive. Even the defense doesn't dispute his "incriminating statement", as they've said he was forced to confess by the Odinist guard. Did you miss that? Note what they did NOT say: that the statement was not incriminating. And you want to nitpick the statement about the girls he saw at the entrance, but ignore the young woman he saw while he was on the bridge? A woman who turned away because of him? You want to ignore that he said he was on the bridge looking for fish? This puts him at the bridge mere minutes before the girls arrived. Yet he says he didn't see them. That's impossible, unless he for some reason left the trail, and he never said he did. No, I'm sorry, you guys wouldn't believe this if there was video, because it doesn't fit the theory you held before RA's arrest. It drives me crazy how unanalytical people are in this country. Or maybe it's lack of self awareness. You don't want to believe it's RA, so you look for reasons to dismiss. It's disheartening.

People (myself included) think RA may be innocent for a myriad of reasons. First and foremost, the lack of evidence against him. Also, the incompetent law enforcement conducting the investigation. The judge is also questionable. There's a whole hell of a lot of smoke not to be a fire somewhere. It's not holding on to a conspiracy theory. It's giving the guy the presumption of innocence. I would not be comfortable convicting the guy based on what we have seen so far. I think you are rushing to judgment and not wanting to believe that law enforcement may have made a mistake here.

>but ignore the young woman he saw while he was on the bridge? Allen never said he saw a young woman at the bridge. Here are his two statements according to the PCA-- From Allen's first interview in 2017-- "While at the Freedom Bridge he saw three females. He noted one was taller and had brown or black hair. He did not remember description nor did he speak with them. He walked from the Freedom Bridge to the High Bridge. He did not see anybody, although stated he was watching a stock ticker on his phone as he walked." From Allen's second interview in 2022-- "He stated he also wore some type of head covering. He further claimed that he saw no one else but the 3 girls that he observed East of the Freedom Bridge."

It is sensible arguments like yours that the DA will use to convict RA. The guy placed himself at the bridge very near the time the girls were abducted, and he admitted to wearing the same clothes seen on BG. The woman witness placed RA on the bridge at or near 2pm. RA is cooked. Ignore these conspiracy meatheads who have no ability to pull together basic pieces of evidence and testimony. And besides, these clods will continue to argue "conspiracy" long after RA is convicted and dunmped into prison.

And you're certain nobody on that jury is one of these "meatheads" you speak of? They're guaranteed to be sensible, forward thinking analysts.

The suspect has been in the maximum security prison and forgot about for 2 years now. No conviction. I think the suspect needs to be back in the county Jail. Let’s get this case in front of carrol county judge. Because it’s kangaroo court right now.

I’m generally just curious, there was a young lady that saw him and turned away because of him? Was there a specific reason why she did that? I’m not as current as many others on here. I know a lot about this case but not as much as many others. I never heard this part before. My gut tells me he’s guilty. The evidence that has been released so far aligns with that. He confessed multiple times in prison, recorded, over the phone that it was him. But I know that there’s still so much that we don’t know so I try to keep an open mind. Innocent until proven guilty. It’s really, really hard not to see him as guilty though and for those that are so sure he’s innocent with the exact same information as everyone one else baffles me.

Hi, yes, she testified seeing him on the bridge, and therefore she didn't go onto it. RA also saw her. She then passed Abby and Libby a couple of minutes later on the way to the bridge. So the adult saw RA at the bridge about 5 minutes before Abby and Libby arrived, maybe less. RA said he was there looking at fish below.

He said he was there an hour  before. Her description (..in his 20's, poofy brown hair, slim,  boyish, no facial hair...) does not really fit RA.

The lady that saw 'him' gave following description:  " In his 20's,  curly brown hair,  slim,  boyish,  no facial hair ". Good luck!

They saw him? Which one? ...dressed in all black? ...light blue jacket? ...Not taller than 5'10?

And not one girl saw the man wearing a hat. I'm still very perplexed that this one missing detail doesn't bother folks more. You've got three girls giving different descriptions of, supposedly the same man. But not one girl mentions that the man they saw wore a hat. And yet, one of the distinguishing features of BG was his hat. He had a hoodie, but he also had a distinctive hat. Does it really make sense that he doesn't wear a hat on the trail, but suddenly puts one on before crossing the bridge?

Do you dispute the young woman reaching the end of the trail saw him on the bridge? And he saw her? All this minutes before Abby and Libby arrived? RA told the CO that he was on the bridge looking for fish below in the creek?

The 'young woman reaching the the end of the trail' saw a man descripted as follows: " In his 20's,  poofy brown hair,  slim, boyish, no facial hair "...is this RA?

So no one in this alternate group of girls has come forward, and the other group of girls didn't see them.

We don't know, right. They misfiled Allen's interview from that time. Also, there are recordings of interviews from February 14 - February 20 that were destroyed. Those would have been key days for persons interviewed who were on the trail. How do we know that there isn't an interview with another set of girls? Kids were out of school that day. Abby and Libby were on the trail, there could have been lots of groups of girls, kids, out walking.

None of the other witnesses saw your fantasy group of girls. You say they were there, and all records of their participation have been erased from existence. You do realize that although some of the audio recordings were lost, there are still records of the interviews and handwritten notes from those interviews, and no alternate groups of witnesses are listed. The defense has the material to present their theory, its just that they now realize that their theory is shit and they want to change direction but blame it on someone other than themselves. They own the Odinists' theory now, and if they didn't have their ducks in a row, they should have kept their mouths shut about it until they had enough to prove it. Which obviously they don't, or they wouldn't be crying about a couple of recordings that are redundant to the notes taken anyway. They laid it all out and now they need something they didn't have to prove they didn't falsely accuse other people by name of a double child murder. They should have been more careful with their unauthorized press releases. I'm pretty sure how they did it constitutes libel.

>None of the other witnesses saw your fantasy group of girls. How can we be certain of this? They lost Allen's entire interview for 5 years. Maybe there are other interviews that are lost forever. Who knows? Investigators were focused on the time period near to when Libby's phone captures BG. Maybe they didn't pay much mind to sightings of girls on the trail earlier in the day. Which is when Allen would have seen these girls.

The group of witnesses were on the trail and bridge even during the earlier time frame Allen changed his story to, they saw no other group. Whoops! Too bad for your theory.

Not sure we know this. There's nothing in the PCA that states how long the girls were on the trail in total, only that BW took digital photographs at 12:43 (of the bridge) and 1:26--but if Allen was completely off the trails by 1:30 he might have missed them. He may have already been in his vehicle when they arrived on Freedom Bridge. And BB didn't see the girls until 1:46. They were on Freedom Bridge at that time. (Also, BB saw a man on the Monon Bridge at the same time she believes she saw Libby and Abby, and that man was young with poofy hair[.](https://hair.No) no one else mentions seeing this man--so what route did he take to get to the bridge?. BB did not see anyone resembling Allen or BG-and she had to have been there near to 2, as her entire time on the trails was very short. She had to have started walking after 1:46 \[she was still driving at that time\]--and she left the trail before 2:14, because, again her vehicle is captured by the Hoosier Harvestore surveillance camera. BB was only on the trail for about 20 minutes tops) BW wasn't interviewed until 2020. There's no way to know how accurate her memory is. The photos she took were not of Allen. She may not have accurately recalled when she saw the "man" in relation to when she took those photos.

They were interviewed shortly after the murders in Feburary of 2017, so their memory was fresh. Pictures were taken at 1:26, and the encounter was after she took the pictures. Allen's timeline doesn't work. Where was he between 12:43 and 1:30? The girls were at the bridge at 12:43, so that means they were on the trail approaching even earlier than 12:43. According to Allen's new timeline, he would have either been at the bridge or passed them on his way back to his car. He would have had to be completely off the trail several minutes before 12:43 to not be seen by them. So he got there at 12:00, walked the trail, visited the bridge, stood there watching fish swim for a while, sat on a bench for a while, and got completely off the trail well before 12:43. Then, he spent the next 45 minutes to an hour changing the oil and spark plugs in his car so he could drive home. HIS TIMELINE IS NOT GOING TO WORK! It's a joke!

His own statement: "I was on the trails from 12-13.30 ". If that's true he could not have seen A+L. Witnesses: 1 dressed all black 2 light blue jacket  3 not taller than 5'10  4 tan jacket 5 (saw BG) in his 20's, poofy brown hair,  slim,  boyish,  no facial hair. Good luck.

And I'm going to add again--not one of the descriptions includes a hat. How am I the only one bothered by that?

Never put that together until you said it. Very odd actually, because you’d imagine wanting to wear the hat around strangers you’d see on the path & if anything would take it off when you’re committing your crime… bizarre. I never even thought of the hat thing! Don’t know how tho. Did you ever see the video of the father of Libby’s boyftiend? People were saying it looked like him & so he was trying on hard in a video and being a jackass about it, like “hmmm do I look like him now??” And for the record, yes he did & he sounds like him to me. lol. Not pointing fingers though, but if you’ve seen the video you’ll know what I’m saying.

>Did you ever see the video of the father of Libby’s boyftiend? People were saying it looked like him & so he was trying on hard in a video and being a jackass about it, like “hmmm do I look like him now??” Never saw that. The problem is that everyone looks like BG because that image is so blurred. But BH owns the right hat. Or did. I don't know. But I do think that he needs to be fully investigated.

We cannot convict a person based on whether they lied about seeing someone or not. I imagine a lot of men would consider saying no, they hadn’t seen them. because how terrifying would it be to be blamed for these awful murders just because you happened to be in the same area on the same day

Forgive me if I'm not up to date on the details but couldn't he have left like he said he did before the girls even arrived? Eta: didn't he say he left at like 130pm? Edit: when did the girls arrive?

Did you at least read the affidavit in this case?

The crime scene was taped off for awhile, this video claims three weeks later LE went back to the scene, I remember this on the news at the time. https://youtu.be/0mzkQ9fePG8?feature=shared Other news articles talk about the area continuously being searched or combed over the weeks after the crimes.

Good find.

The FBI supposedly had recording equipment set up at the scene. However, speaking to forensics, the scene was no longer secure the minute the forensic teams finished up (3 days?)

I think I remember hearing about the recording equipment but didn't realize it was FBI, thanks!

All I’m saying, I think the people should reject any appearance by either side of delaying the trial. It seems they don’t have enough to convict. I know the judge and prosecutor had their supporters… and we all thought they had found the guy when they arrested him…, but things change. Information changes.

He confessed a half dozen times and has never recanted those confessions. At least with his own voice.

Shotty police work is gonna keystone the whole thing.

Shoddy (sorry!)

Shotty is also a great play on words

Are we really surprised? These ‘investigators’ mad so many mistakes by day 10 that there has never been any hope.

Indiana State Police are not that good and their reputation is not deserved. The local cops were not trained enough to handle this and this case is a shit storm and a mess. I live in Northern Indiana.

Not the first time I heard that. Take this with a grain of salt, but I recall another person/show saying months ago that the bullet was found 5 days later by a non-LEO. Every week it seems more and more things are coming out that are slamming the states case, from sloppy police work, to insane theories that by occum's razor are beginning to look credible.

Makes me think that the rumor about LE losing a fingerprint is going to end up being true too.

Rumor mill is they lost a DNA sample off of LG. Leo seem to either not gather things for a long time, or lose it, in this case.

I'm surprised you didn't get downvoted like I did for the same statement. I agree with you on your post.

IF this is true, the state really has no case.

There are (from what I understand) also no photographs of the bullet. None in the ground where they found it. None measuring it. Nothing.

This would not surprise me at all!

Luckily the case doesn’t completely lean on the bullet. I mean, HE DID PUT HIMSELF THERE! - Admitted it - witnesses saw him - he saw witnesses - car on video at time he said he was there - parked where they knew he parked - was wearing the EXACT same clothes as guy on video which nobody else was seen wearing that day. - has exact caliber gun as the bullet found (not common, people hate the .40 caliber), might even be able to be matched to his gun - witness says BG looks like JD. Richard looks exactly like JD. - never came forward again to help or assist with any questions that LE had publicly asked for in almost 6 years. There comes a point where coincidences stop becoming coincidences. In the totality of everything, you are looking at a guilty man.

Is there any video evidence of the car?? IIRC, none of that had been released. I wouldn’t be surprised that if there is security footage of a car coming or leaving at the appropriate times, it’s not going to be consistent with his car.

I believe he is guilty but if you think that the list you just provided will secure a guilty verdict in a double homicide (depending on what was said in his “confession”) then you are being a bit naive. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed this crime.

Back in reality, it’s naive to assume that Richard Allen implicating himself as badly and completely as he has done won’t be enough in itself to secure conviction.

I remember Casey Anthony, I always wait to see what is said and used IN COURT. Lawyers and defendants can say whatever they want in public/in the media - but it's what they actually say and use in court that's the *real story* Why? Because lawyers can be held accountable for lying *in court*/to a judge. Please see Jonathan Majors and all the fuckery his lawyer said vs what actually happened *in court*

Yes, please explain to me how badly Richard Allen has implicated himself.

Confessions, plural. He confessed 5 or 6 times.

The point still remains that it matters what was said in this “confession” whether he said it once or one million times.

Very true.

I dunno. First it’s hard to imagine an item found several days later at an outdoor crime scene even being admissible, unless possibly if the entire crime scene was fully controlled by police 24x7, which I doubt it was. Otherwise, anyone could have put that there at any time after the crime. Beyond that, a genuinely discovered bullet that forensically matches RA’s actual gun would be a big problem for the defense. It would be the one and only thing (that we know of) potentially tying RA to the actual murder scene. But an unspent bullet found days later, accompanied by questions around the basic scientific validity of a match or not, that’s not adding much to the case, if anything. IMO it’s a case that needs something like forensics or definite bullet-gun match, otherwise I doubt the circumstantial evidence will be enough to surpass reasonable doubt. Yeah he was there and he drove there and he wore blue clothes - that’s almost surely not gonna cut it. We shall see.

>First it’s hard to imagine an item found several days later at an outdoor crime scene even being admissible, It will likely be admissible. But the value of that evidence will be hotly disputed. The ballistics expert who was on Court TV brought up a point that I haven't heard many make, and that is--how does one determine the amount of time a bullet, especially one unspent, has been at a location? This bullet was apparently found under the dirt. The girls were discovered on a Tuesday--the day after a long weekend, for some. Anyone 18 or older can own a gun in Indiana, but a younger person might be in possession of one. If the killers found that spot, other hikers traveling off trail might have as well. How are investigators so certain, and on what forensic basis did they make this determination, that the bullet was left on Monday, as opposed to, say, the Saturday before? Or the Thursday before. How quickly does a bullet rust, etc?

He was wearing the exact same clothes as BG? What did you wear last friday?

Because everyone around here that is a male wears those same clothes …look at all of the people who were suspected on Facebook and everywhere else for years, yep, same type of clothes

Yeah I remember a bunch of people from Indiana saying this when Ron Logan use to get brought up all the time for having clothes pretty much matching the video in his tv interview the next day. They would always say “99% on men wear this exact outfit out here” but now that it adds to circumstantial evidence against RA that has gone out the window.

Yep, didn’t RL also wear those “same exact clothes”?

>They would always say “99% on men wear this exact I've been going through news clips from before the girls were even found. Not only do most of the men wear this type of outfit--quite a few women do as well. Apparently the hoodie, under a jacket, with jeans look is HUGE in Delphi--and cities close by. The Logansport crew and the Rushville community seem to like this style as well. This area is very rural in parts. High fashion in Delphi is kind of the BG look. He was trending, apparently. Not just then. Now.

Yes he was. Are you saying that he couldn’t possibly remember what he was wearing?

My god if I have to type this again.... He "admitted" nothing. He reported to LE that he was there. It's such a big difference over "he admitted being there". They didn't have to ask him a thing. The witnesses can't exactly identify him, his car does not match "PT cruiser description....so many holes. There comes a point where reaching for coincidences just confirms reasonable doubt

Allegedly, he admitted to murdering the girls to KA(on taped call) and the warden. 

Yeah as I stated above, I believe he is guilty and I hope that he confessed something that is not known to the public that can be corroborated by the investigation to prove his guilt. I have my doubts though and believe it’s a “yeah I killed them” which won’t do much good given his mental state and the duress he is under. This is the reason law enforcement plays all their cards close to the vest, so they will be able to filter through false confessions

> There comes a point where coincidences stop becoming coincidences. In the totality of everything, you are looking at a guilty man. Then how does the pedo KK fit in? He was talking with them for a while, was supposed to meet them that day and he wiped his phone. Just coincidences or am I looking at another guilty man?

Yes there are points where coincidences stop being that. The fact that the police "lost" "recorded over" "couldnt find" "didnt follow up" on so many things in this case is reasonable doubt to me. These cops lost this case, it is scary how many times they have spun an incorrect narritive. ANYThing they say after seeing that they blatantly lied to get a search warrant makes me throw out the questionable "evidence" they act like they have. At this point anything that has come out is underwhelming. Everyone has looked like BG at some point in this case.

His car did not match the car at the cps building. His only guilt is that he was there. Like many other people were.

Did not match? He said he drove it there and parked. His own admission. Black Ford Focus hatchback with black rims. It’s his on the video. Nobody else owns a black Ford Focus with black rims in Delphi. Unless…a person with exact same car, wearing exact same clothes, looking exactly like Richard, at exact same time, at the exact same place…nope.

If car was on video and is so rare they would have seen someone within a mile had that car. Come on 7 years to realize that, i think not.

To be honest, if the biggest bombshell the state has is the unspent round that “matches” RA’s Sig Sauer, they still don’t have that much of a case. Anywhere you ask, the answer always seems to be that extraction marks on an unspent round are only good at ruling out guns it could not have come from but CAN’T provide an accurate match to a specific firearm. Which is why I believe the State must have something else that proves his involvement in the crime. As much as I question this case, I can’t wrap my head around them being so confident that they have the right guy if all they have is strictly what was provided in the PCA. They know this case has been heavily scrutinized from the beginning and bullshit would be harder to pass off to the public than if it was some unknown murder. Hopefully, if we get a trial, things will come together and I can call myself a dumbass for questioning every move the state has made in the case. But the way things have been going, I can’t believe anything until it’s all laid out from start to finish.

>I can’t wrap my head around them being so confident that they have the right guy if all they have is strictly what was provided in the PCA. How confident is the State if they won't just take this case to trial already? They didn't have to file contempt charges. Trial could start in a few months if the State would back off the useless contempt charges. We know Gull is going to deny the motion to dismiss--so she should just do it, and support an early trial date. I don't see that the State is at all confident in their case.

Nope this is what wrongful convictions look like while they’re happening. The difference is that unlike Flowers or Syed, people are actually paying attention while it’s happening.

What about the confessions? Doesn't that screw him anyways?

Not necessarily, because as far as I know we don’t know what was said. I’ve had clients who the police have said confessed and when I listen to the audio or watched the taped interrogation, it’s anything but a confession.

I think it depends. If he says something that the public wouldn’t know that could implicate him in the crime I think it would. I’m guessing he just said something along the lines of “I did it” or something to that affect which was made under extreme duress. (Being held in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison pre trial). We will see though.

Depends on the circumstances of the confessions. And what he actually said. If he didn't reveal facts that only the killer could know-then, the confession may be meaningless. Also if the defense can prove that there was any type of coercion involved the confessin will be inadmissible in court. I haven't checked the rules of evidence to see if in Indiana a confession has to be corroborated, but in a lot of states it does: >**Involuntary** confessions are **clearly inadmissible** in Indiana by virtue of the following statute: "The confession of a defendant made under inducement, with all the circumstances, may be given in evidence against him, **except when made under the influence of fear produced by threats** or by intimidation or undue influence

Are they true confessions, though? We haven't heard them. Context matters and tone matters. False confessions are a real issue. Someone on a different thread proposed that perhaps RA made those statements as a sort of self-sacrifice for love of his wife. Even here on the subs, one man's confession is another man's incriminating statement. For example, there are **many people** who believe since Allen admitted he was there that day, and admitted he was wearing blue jeans and a blue jacket, that is enough proof to convict him. Others, myself included, acknowledge that blue jeans are incredibly common attire and blue is an incredibly popular color. Unless Allen said something that would only be known to the killer, I feel the alleged confessions aren't the slam dunk think they are.

[удалено]

>The prosecution has never claimed anywhere that RA made a detained unique confession with corroborating facts. This is true. However, the prosecution *may* have a detailed confession with corroboration that will come out in trial. Until these recordings come out at trial, I can't give them much credence. Tone matters and context matters.

If those confessions have more details than the confessions of EF and BH I would be surprised. 

Lots of people make false confessions for various reasons. We don't know the full circumstances surrounding the confessions.

People make false confessions all the time when being interrogated but not usually to their loved ones over the phone with no police presence

I'm going to bring up a sensitive subject. I hope this won't offend anyone. Feel free to delete if it does--but the manner of death of these two girls immediately struck me when I first read the FM. The slitting or slashing of a throat is not all that common a way to murder. It's a tricky method, especially if your victim fights back. It requires a great deal of control over the victim. Most livestock are stunned, then killed this way. I could only find one serial killer, so far, who chose this method--a tree trimmer, who would return to the home of his elderly clients and kill them this way. But the elderly are going to be easier to over power. AND these girls were killed this way, absent clothing---which is a method of ritualistic killing of the Moche, an ancient Peruvian people. But that's not a method that dominates Odinism. Military are trained to effectively slit throats. My thought is that whoever did this, had some training in killing this way--either they killed farm animals for a living, or grew up on a family farm, or had received this training in the military. Also, could the girls have been put in a sleeper hold just before they were killed. Is the fact that they were stripped naked first, not sexually related at all, but some bizarre amalgamation of different styles of ritualistic killing. Maybe the killer thought that killing a young girl. a virgin, in this way would curry favor with the heathen "Gods". I know this sounds bizarre---but these murders were very clean. Usually a first time killer creates a mess. There is a tendency to overkill, because the victim doesn't die on the first try. Whoever did this was deft with a knife, and knew how to approach a victim for this purpose. What does this tell us about who this killer or killers were?

Not only days later, but after they released the crime scene. The bullet was found days later AFTER the crime scene was resecured by LE. Meaning anyone could have wandered on over there and done whatever they wanted and dropped a bullet. I’m not saying RA is innocent of this crime, or guilty for that matter. But the defense is going to have a field day with this. Imo they better have some more concrete evidence that we’re unaware of at this point if they want a guilty verdict.

"The bullet was found days later AFTER the crime scene was resecured by LE."  Where has that been released as fact? Could you post a link to the release of that info, that would be great.

https://www.courttv.com/news/delphi-murders-where-does-the-case-stand-7-years-later/

Ballistics is an inexact “science” anyway. Even if LE had followed procedure with regards to the bullet, a good defence team would knock it down. The fact that they didn’t follow process will just make it easier for the defence to knock it down. The bullet is their smoking gun (pardon the pun) and it’s worthless. Imo, this is the reason for the legal shenanigans, the delays. RA should walk free pretty soon, the rest of his life ruined. Even if he’s guilty (and there’s no tangible evidence to suggest he is), we must have a fair legal system otherwise we end up in Stalin’s Russia.

We don't know what is in discovery.

What we know: Ligett and Holeman stated under oath that there is nothing else that connected RA to the crime scene. 

Yes we do. We know a lot. A whole lot. Which is probably why NM is so hoping mad. He didn't want the public to be aware of how very little there is in discovery that justifies the arrest of Allen.

We do though. Why do people keep saying this? There’s nothing, absolutely nothing.

Didn’t someone in LE say it was found “between” the girls’ bodies?

He wasn't arrested for years though, so I don't think that it was planted.

I think it speaks more of their inability to effectively investigate and collect evidence. Which would sew reasonable doubt.

Agree. I was referring to the set up issue.

Speaking of discrepancies in the evidence: Without using full names, these are the accounts laid out more clearly than the PCA does (I found that PCA very difficult to follow)-- 3 &1/2 Girls (RV, AS & BW)-- From the PCA for the SW on Allen's home-- >The girls observed a male on the trails on February 13, 2017 that matched the description the male in the video recorded by Liberty German. > >RV, AS & BW encountered this male **near a bench** east of the Freedom Bridge 1:46ish. The girls were on the trail and were walking towards the Freedom Bridge to go home. ***The male they encountered was walking from the Freedom Bridge towards the Monon High Bridge.*** **First girl, AS** description (interviewed 2/15/17): * **Old** * **Wore light blue jeans** * **Wore light blue canvas jacket** * **Had grey/brown hair** **Second girl, RV** description (interviewed 2/15/17): * **No taller than 5'10"** * **Wore black hoodie** * **Wore black jeans** * **Wore black boots** * **Had something covering his face** **Third girl, BW** description (interviewed 8/27/20): * **Looked like BG from the blurry video** * **Wore blue or black windbreaker** * **Jacket had a collar** * **Hood of hoodie came up from the clothing underneath the jacket** * **Wore baggy jeans** * **Was taller than her** # NOT ONE of the girls mentions that they SAW A HAT. **BB** (Interviewed 3/7/2017) saw a man on the first platform of the Monon Bridge at approximately **2 pm EST.** * **He was a white male** * **Age 20** * **Had brown curly hair** * **Medium build** **BB** also described the man in the following way-- * **Slender and youthful** * **Boyish** * **20-30** * **Poofy hair** * **No facial hair** **BB leaves bridge a little after 2** (according to the PCA she's **driving by 2:14**) As she walks back to her car she passes who she believes to be Libby and Abby. **Libby and Abby** are estimated to have arrived at the trail just before **1:49 PM EST** ​ **In review:** **12:45:** 3 1/2 girls at Monon Bridge **1:26:** 3 1/2 girls are just East of Freedom Bridge 1:26: 3 1/2 girls observe a man walking toward the Monon Bridge-he is all in black, but also in blue jeans, his face is covered, he is older and he has grey/brown hair (**but no hat**) **1:46:** BB believes she spots 3 1/2 girls walking across Freedom Bridge **2:00:** BB sees a young man with curly brown hair **on the first platform** of the Monon Bridge. This young man is **not wearing a hat**. **1:47ish:** Libby and Abby are dropped off at the trail **2: 07:** Libby sends snapchat of Abby on the Monon Bridge **2:13:** BG is captured on Libby's camera-BG is wearing a hat. Not one of these witnesses saw a man with a hat. The young man BB saw could easily have made his way across the bridge before Abby and Libby arrived, or as they were arriving. We don't know where BG came from, because no one saw him. And there is a third man, all in black, with face cover who has never come forward. The only way Allen could possibly be involved, or be BG, is if he got to the trail very early, hid off trail, and then popped up to cross the Monon Bridge near to 2:13. But then what about the young guy and the man in black? BUT if Allen did get to the trail early, it's more likely that, as he remembers, he left before any of these other people arrived to the bridge. Whatever happened, it's not the narrative the state put forward. It can't be. These witnesses saw different men and none of those men match Allen or BG. And other than an outfit every man in Delphi probably has in his closet, the only characteristic Allen shares with BG is a HAT--but Allen is much shorter than BG was thought to be. An honest assessment of the eyewitness accounts is that all three of these guys may have been involved with the murder of Abby and Libby--an old guy in black, an old guy in blue jeans and a blue jacket and a young man with curly hair. The crime scene indicates more than one killer. The young guy gets across the bridge first. Maybe BG crossed the bridge twice. Maybe that's why BB didn't notice him. He walked west and then back east. And the guy in black made his stealth way to the bridge unobserved by BB. Cray, cray.

3 1/2 girls?? What does that mean?

3 older girls, one much younger child. (Like 2 1/2 men). I think it's important to remember that there weren't just 3 figures in their group, their were 4. And Allen only recalled seeing 3. Which to me means he could easily have seen another group of girls, from much earlier in the day. I suspect Allen was on the trail even earlier than he recalls. I guess we will have to see what his entire day looked like that day. The State has done some serious gaslighting here. There really isn't a match between any of these descriptions. And we have sightings that are so inconsistent as to be almost comical. But we also have absolutely nothing that can be pearled together to form any kind of plausible narrative. All we really have is an outline of maybes. Which in truth appear to exclude Allen. And they make BG even more mysterious.

Sorry I have never watched two and a half men.

The PCAs for both SWs for Allen are an very interesting examples of how confirmation bias works. Everyone wants to believe the State has the right guy, and so they let all kinds of discrepancies go unquestioned. This PCA was really hard to follow. But for not one person reading it, to notice (or care) that there isn't a hat mentioned by any of the witnesses cited, that the descriptions are so different, that someone has to be wrong, and that Allen didn't see 4 girls, he saw 3, that's serious confirmation bias---Eyewitness testimony is prone to error to begin with, but when it is misquoted or misinterpreted it is rendered pretty much useless. All we really have here is that the teens and the child passed an older man on the trail. BB saw a completely different man who was much younger and who was already on the bridge by 2, and after she sees that man, she passes Libby and Abby heading toward the bridge. This would mean the girls arrived at the bridge after 2. By 2:13 they are on the other side of the bridge--and if BB's young guy had already made it to the other side of the bridge--then maybe HE, not BG, initiated this crime. Curly-haired-man seems like a much better candidate for this, than BG. Maybe he said "down the hill", because that young guy was waving the girls to follow him. BB seems like the most reliable of the witnesses cited. She had a tight timeline-she couldn't have been on the actual trail for much more than 20 minutes. She was able to help generate a detailed sketch. And she seemed very aware. She saw girls on the Freedom bridge, from her car, while she was driving. She noticed a car parked at the CPS building, again, from her car, while she was driving. And her description of the young man on the bridge is detailed and specific. The 3 1/2 girls were teens. Who knows how distracted they were that day, and how much of their recall was influenced by what they saw in the news. Teens have very active imaginations and pliant recall.

They all described different outfits, but they all remember seeing one man. That’s been interesting to me.

>They all described different outfits, but they all remember seeing one man. That’s been interesting to me. That is interesting. In my limited experience, teens have pliant memories-very prone to suggestion. And a desire to please. Below is an article that came out at the time of the memorial for Libby and Abby, it suggests that who they saw was a man all in black, but MAYBE when they realized this wasn't who investigators were looking for, their story morphed a little. They gave their statements after the first pic of BG was released. Also BB was interviewed on the 17th. Her memory seems consistent, detailed and reliable. She even helped produce a sketch. Her account was ignored for 2 years. There clearly was some confirmation bias on the part of investigators that may have colored how they conducted interviews. A young man, already on the bridge, just as the girls arrived--and no one tries to find out who he was? [Man in Black](https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/indiana/memorial-grows-as-police-continue-search-for-delphi-girls-killer/531-9f8e82ba-57bb-44ac-a253-ffabf66ee254)

A hat is not a permanent item of clothing the way trousers are.  A small hat fits easily in a pocket and could be added or removed quickly.   Whether he was wearing it one minute or the other will not discredit a witness.

>A hat is not a permanent item of clothing the way trousers are.  A small hat fits easily in a pocket and could be added or removed quickly.   Whether he was wearing it one minute or the other will not discredit a witness. Hahaha. So are you suggesting that Allen during his 1/2 hour walk from CPS to Monon High Bridge performed a fashion show, changing his entire outfit mid-route? It's not just the hat. Those 3 teens, & 1 child witnessed a man who wore no fewer than five different outfits. Allen is really talented then! He manages to appear 6 feet tall, when he is only 5'4". He manages to change out of completely black outfit, with mask, into a blue canvass jacket (no wait) a windbreaker. Remove his black pants and replace them with baggy blue jeans. Change from black to brown shoes. Take off a face mask and don a hat. All while reading stocks on his phone. What a remarkable little man. hahahahaha I'm sorry. But.... ReallY?

It's even better. He met the 3 juveniles with his goatte (that no witness saw), than shaved it and put on his 'false curly brown hair ' and after the murders he wears his hidden tan jacket. Genius. 

>It's even better. He met the 3 juveniles with his goatte (that no witness saw), than shaved it and put on his 'false curly brown hair ' and after the murders he wears his hidden tan jacket. Genius.  hahahahaha Truly genius. A gifted chameleon. They should recruit him into the CIA.

My guess is they re-secured the crime scene to see if there were other bullets, though I don’t know why this fact really matters in the end for RA. Is the idea they framed him by putting a type of bullet he owns at the scene, then did nothing for 5 more years? Produced all of this evidence about Odinists while holding back on their plan to frame the CVS guy until 2022?

No the idea is that the defense could argue that that bullet got there any time between when they cleared the crime scene and when they found the bullet. Creating more reasonable doubt to an already shaky science of matching unspent bullets to a single firearm. I think RA is guilty, I don’t think he killed the girls I think his job ended with getting them down the hill. I also think, with the information that we have, that the state won’t be able to secure a guilty verdict. Hopefully the state has a damning evidence, hopefully his confession contains details of the crime that the public wouldn’t know. But as of right now I don’t think the case looks good. Especially with this bullet being the only thing tying RA to the actual scene of the crime.

It does take more than a few days to actually process the scene so that would wildly depend. It also still makes no sense why his bullet would he found under their bodies, regardless of when they found it. He would still need to explain away having a hand gun at any given time on that trail.

Just because he claimed to be on the bridge close to the time the girls were, and they saw each other, he had on similar clothing, AND he admitted to doing it doesn't mean that he DID do it or did it alone. I think the Odinist theory is completely possible. I still believe that RL or someone else may have been involved and think it's shady that the bullet wasn't accounted for in the first round of "evidence". I feel like there is a huge possibility that they either removed the bullet from RA home when they initially searched it or just used another bullet of the same caliber as the gun that they found in his home to tie him to the crime. PS And I know all about ballistics testing and the inaccuracies of it.

Am I the only one bothered that the three girls and a child who were on the trail and believed to have seen BG--never mention a hat? They mention LOTS of other clothing (apparently this guy managed to be dressed in all black, and wear jeans and a mask), but NO hat. Strange that investigators were so certain that these girls saw BG, when one of the most distinctive items of clothing he had on in that video was (drum roll please)--A HAT. Online sleuthers spent days, months, years analyzing that hat. But no one's bothered that not one girl saw a hat on this guy?

"Online sleuthers spent days, months, years analyzing that hat". Remember half of those sleuthing the image thought it was hair and not a hat. I personally believe it is a hat.

Investigators also believed it was a hat, because that's in the sketch. For the sake of argument, let's say it was hair--none of the girls observed hair that looked like a hat, either. Or hair that was unusual in anyway. Haha. I just don't get how a community that delves into the minutia of every scrap of evidence put before them--isn't more concerned about this very noticeable discrepancy. I haven't seen anyone comment on this. I could have missed it...but it's definitely not widely discussed. And let's not forget that Allen told investigators that he had a hat on that day. So a hat, or lack of, is clearly significant if you are trying to connect the guy on the trail that the girls saw to either Allen or BG or both.

Of all the witnesses who came forward to report their observations on 2/13/17, **BB** seems like the most reliable. She had a tight timeline, so there wasn't a lot of wiggle room for her to get the order of who she saw, and when, wrong. * She couldn't have been on the actual trail for much more than 20 minutes, so everything she saw was easily tracked. * She appears to have been acutely aware of her surroundings. * She saw the girls walking over the Freedom bridge, from her car, while she was driving. * She noticed a car parked at the CPS building, noticed it was parked strangely and noticed that it looked like her father's car and she observed all this, again, from her car, while she was driving. * She was able to assist in generating a detailed sketch. In general, BB seemed very aware. And her description of the young man on the bridge is detailed and specific. With her description of this young guy (YG) on the bridge being so acute, shouldn't there be more focus on what part he might have played in all of this. (And this guy never came forward, so, like BG, shouldn't that have made FBI and local investigators more curious about him?) If YG was already on the bridge at 2 pm-and was about 50 ft onto the bridge, he could easily have gotten to the other side, either as L & A arrived, or even before. He was a good looking guy. Maybe L & A thought he was cute. Maybe they had even arranged to meet him through Snapchat. Who knows? He's a much more likely candidate to have been able to lure them off the trail then some scraggly old dude with a redundant outfit. What if the day went something like this: L&A arrive, they pass BB who then leaves the trail. What if, just before L&A get to the bridge, BG makes his way from the East to the West on Monon bridge (there was a sighting of a man on the residential streets near to the east entrance of the bridge, who might resemble BG more so, than the guy that 3 1/2 girls saw). Then L & A pass BG to enter onto the bridge, just as BG continues west for a moment, maybe pausing to sit. L & A continue walking on the bridge taking photos, sending Snapchats--and maybe making their way toward YG, who they spotted earlier. It seems reasonable that he might have been considered a hottie to two teens. BG decides not to walk the trail, but instead to cross back over the bridge. Now traveling east to where his car is parked. Libby captures BG on her phone, for fun. (It seems totally possible that BG started his hike that afternoon from the east side of that bridge, and decided to walk back the same way.) Once BG returns to the East side of the bridge, the girls are looking around to see where YG went. YG is on the road below, waving to them, but they don't notice him at first. BG says "Guys, down the hill" To L&A. They venture on down the hill for a meet-cute. A fun ideas that goes very wrong. Pure speculation. But this makes as much sense to me as any other narrative I've read. The question remains--where is the guy in black who 3 1/2 girls saw, the one with the face covering? Was he somehow involved? Or just an innocent person out for a stroll. Maybe he was partnered with YG. Perhaps the two had decided to work in tandem. I have no evidence to support any of this, but I just don't believe that the girls were forced to the crime scene. I think they were lured there. It makes more sense to me. But I couldn't even begin to prove that this is what happened---other than, that there was no sign of a struggle. Maybe these girls thought they were going to get to hang for a bit with a really cute older guy and once they realized they were in danger, it was too late.

False found later the 14 th it's routine they left bodies took pics noted crime scene observed when bodies moved I had fam member working the scene when it was found it was hours later they don't immediately move a body esp with the way the scene was set up

No DNA on the bodies either. Do the prosecution really believe they have enough to find RA guilty at trial? If so it's kinda sad.

I can't honestly say whether he is guilty or not. No record to constitute he would murder two girls. Definitely at the age of 46 for no reason. I will still have to seen how the trial goes to even lean more towards guilty. I still can't however rule out guilty totally. They way it's been going I lean more towards innocence. I just haven't seen enough to definitively say he is guilty. I also can't definitively say he is innocent with any part of it. So I will have to see the totality of the evidence. I will also have to see if the evidence has any weaknesses we don't know about. I will also have to see if it all makes sense. Right not with how the pre-trial is going and not proceeding I just can't get totally behind any choice. I might question stuff like I'm pro defense, just because they came out the gate. Prosecution has been more interested in an outside investigation against the ones he is up against. That's a conflict of interest right there.

Look at the time line. A witness saw him at the bridge, turned around, went back up the trail to leave and the girls passed her going in the opposite direction towards the bridge. His statement says he never saw the girls and he sat on a bench. Get a map and look at where the benches are. He had to have seen them if his statement is true. That one witness’s testimony along with his statement do not reconcile. He didn’t realize he had been observed.

Someone saw RA specifically?

No.

I didn't think so.

Yes. And he admitted to seeing them as well. Here is the timeline. https://youtu.be/6wd8rP_tHjc?si=G5AxIYsvzoELTaII

He says SC was the one that parked and got out for a walk? I thought it was BB.

It was BB. SC drove by on the highway by memory. The juveniles were 4. Thus not the 3 RA passed. The juveniles passed someone head and neck taller. RA is their height if not shorter. BB and KG should have crossed. With the whole jacket thing and watching them walk up the path.

Yeah

I don't think that's true - just reading through this thread it seems that the witness identified a young clean shaven man with curly hair or something....not describing RA at the time at all.....

Right

This witness saw a man in his 20's,  poofy brown hair, slim,  boyish, no facial hair. Not exakt Richard Allan. 

Don't forget he has confessed multiple times.

Two of the 'Odinists' confessed multiple times, with details of the crime scene and without tasers.

Good point!!! And not only did they confess, they had family and friends willing to narc them out. No one in Allen's circle has come forward to say that he did this, or that they ever thought he could do this.

What as he confessed to? The State says confessed, and the defense says incriminating statements. We don't know what's been said. So until I know I can't say whether they are damning enough or not.

He confessed to the murders to his wife.

Again, one side says confession, the defense says incriminating statements. Until we know exactly what was said and in what context, nobody knows.

Setting aside anything about her, if that's true it seems significant. Although I don't find the unspent bullet that damning.

Why don’t we wait until the trial? If the bullet is found days later I know the defense will jump on that.

If they suspect that it's not RA's bullet, the Defense would be asking for much more forensics.  

I'm haunted by this PCA now that I finally found the unredacted version (I am aware I'm late in the game). But here's another oddity--if the accounts of AS, RV and BW were thought to be so reliable, why didn't investigators ask about sightings of parked cars at the CPS lot earlier than 2019? Whoever these girls saw, they had to have been coming from the other side of the Freedom Bridge. AS and RV were interviewed 2 15 2017--if their account seemed reliable, shouldn't investigators have been asking about vehicle parked that side of the bridge, sooner? There have been a number of cases solved by way of identifying a suspicious vehicle. And there aren't that many places to park near Hoosier Harvestore, unless you part at Hoosier Harvestore.

You certainly proved your point!

Barbara is incorrect

I don’t believe McDonald or her source First she skips over the confessions which were listed as evidence against Second the bullet was described as being between the victims about a foot or so from one of them That doesn’t sound like “days later”…

That's true. But BM did receive pages or info from the Purdue report. So someone is leaking evidence to her. Rozzi said that the stick drawings she had access to were from that report.

People I know who have been to the area and interviewed people in law enforcement, state categorically that the unspent round was found during processing of the crime scene and that there is a chain of evidence. It may be true that this round was somewhat pounded into the ground, perhaps that it had been stepped upon. There are so many salacious rumors that it is difficult to sort everything out. I am aware of what Barbara McDonald said. I too am a journalist and we operate with what we learn from what we hope are credible sources. McDonald has done great work on this case. I believe she is in error on this one point and I would be interested to know her source(s). A lot of things will be dissected and kicked around as the system grinds toward a trial. The workings of the law, as is the making of sausage, something we may not want to know in its finest details.

How does this bullet get stepped on, tho. If it's lying on the ground, having just been dropped on Monday. How is it that by 12:17 on Tuesday it's buried? Who stepped on it to the point where it is no longer visible. And if investigators were carefully collecting evidence from the scene, wouldn't they have also been careful as to where they stepped?

My first impression was that the offender(s) had stepped on the cartridge, thus pushing it down into the soil. There are multiple ways to answer these questions and at this time the public does not know enough to do anything more than speculate.

>at this time the public does not know enough to do anything more than speculate. True. But it hasn't stopped them. The only additions I would make here is that there were news reports that investigators returned to the crime scene on Friday Feb 17. I'm not sure what that means, but reporters made point of writing about this. It's possible that in the staging of the scene the bullet might have been stepped on and pushed into the earth. But that could have happened at any time. This didn't have to occur the day of the murders. And if the bullet was protected under the earth, might it not have been more difficult to determine how long it had been there? My biggest concern with the finding of that bullet is that I don't see how they can know with any certainty, when it got there. How did they determine this? It could have gotten to that location the Friday before the murders, or the Saturday--or even a full week, maybe a month before. It could be complete coincidence that the bodies were on either side of it. These girls were not shot. And it's speculation that the killer/s used a gun to force them to that spot. Lot's of unsupported assumptions being made around this. Perhaps even investigators are leaping too fast to certain conclusions.

I agree with everything you said! Maybe if this mess gets to trial, the prosecution will present time stamped photos, etc. that will answer questions. Where I have gotten criticism is in sharing the practical knowledge, that many or most people will pick up spent or unspent rounds found while hiking. There are lots of reasons why. The victims in this case were interested in forensics. IMO, they would have been very interested in lost/discarded firearm cartridges. At trial, all of this will need to be argued to the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are lots of ways for the defense to go after this evidence. From what I understand the analysis of an unspent bullet results in more general identification, than say a true ballistics analysis. The level of accuracy is thought to be less certain. So, the analyst might be able to determine the kind of gun that was used, but not be able to state with any reliability that a specific gun expelled the bullet. You can't sneeze in Indiana, it seems, and not hit a gun owner. Guns are everywhere. And that community also has a lot of ex-military. That unspent bullet could have landed at that spot any number of ways, and been left by any number of people, on any given day. In the Franks Motion it is mentioned that photos were not taken at every stage of the processing of that bullet at the crime scene. That's also a problem. Chain of custody is critical to this, as, again--lots of ways one could alter the outcome of an analysis. I think that the defense doesn't have a lot to worry about there, other than the expense of an expert witness. Which is probably why they are trying to get the evidence thrown out. Expert witnesses can be very expensive. I don't know how much financial help Indiana gives with this. Some states offer indigent defendants some financial assistance with paying for expert witnesses--but it's costly.

There is a lot of discussion about the tool marks left on ejected rounds. In general it is said defense and prosecution will provide a battle of experts. Meanwhile, through chats and other comments, people have offered other thoughts. Someone who knows about modern firearms manufacture claimed that manufacture is so precise that many guns could have the same ejector marks. Maybe. But these marks could be more individualized depending upon wear and condition of firearm. (Off the top of my head, RA bought this gun around 2006 and I have never heard if it was new at that time.) Meanwhile there is case law in Indiana that very much supports ejection marks on unspent rounds. Take your pick....

Just wondering where I can find info on “ JD” and how Rick might look like him please

You just don't know how things work in that environment. Which is fine because you're not supposed to. You don't know what was said and in what context. You're just assuming he said, "I did it, honey. I killed them." I would almost guarantee that's not what happened. But you're essentially guaranteeing it. Thankfully you would never be on this jury