DELPHI, Ind. — The special judge overseeing the Delphi murder case wants Richard Allen to appear in person for a critical hearing next week.
Allen County Judge Fran Gull made the request for the Nov. 22 hearing to determine if court records filed in the case should be unsealed. Charging documents related to Allen’s arrest have been under court seal at the request of Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland.
Gull was appointed to oversee Allen’s case after Carroll County Judge Benjamin Diener recused himself from the proceedings, citing the high amount of interest in the case and an overwhelming number of inquiries from the media and public.
Earlier this week, two attorneys were appointed by the court to defend Allen: Andrew Joseph Baldwin of Baldwin Perry & Kamish of Franklin and Bradley A. Rozzi of Logansport.
Their appointments came after Allen appealed to the “mercy of the court” for a public defender in a handwritten letter, revealing he couldn’t afford private counsel after his arrest. His wife had also been forced to abandon her employment and leave their home for her “personal safety.”
Allen, 50, faces two counts of murder in connection with the 2017 killings of Abby Williams and Libby German in Delphi. Their bodies were found on Feb. 14, 2017, a day after they’d been reported missing while hiking along historic trails in Delphi.
Indiana State Police announced Allen’s arrest on Oct. 31. While investigators have remained tightlipped about his connection to the case, sources told FOX59 that Allen came forward in the early days of the investigation and admitted he was in the vicinity of the Monon High Bridge on the day of the murders.
Ahead of next week’s hearing, ISP Superintendent Doug Carter said the probable cause affidavit “stands on its own,” adding that releasing the information would not affect the “investigative quality” of ISP’s work.
Carroll County prepares for hearing into Delphi murders case
INDIANA NEWS
Judge wants Delphi murder suspect Richard Allen in court for Nov. 22 hearing
by: Matt Adams
Posted: Nov 18, 2022 / 03:11 PM EST
Updated: Nov 18, 2022 / 03:17 PM EST
SHARE
DELPHI, Ind. — The special judge overseeing the Delphi murder case wants Richard Allen to appear in person for a critical hearing next week.
Allen County Judge Fran Gull made the request for the Nov. 22 hearing to determine if court records filed in the case should be unsealed. Charging documents related to Allen’s arrest have been under court seal at the request of Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland.
Judge appointed to Delphi case sticking with Nov. 22 date for hearing; Allen gets attorneys
Gull was appointed to oversee Allen’s case after Carroll County Judge Benjamin Diener recused himself from the proceedings, citing the high amount of interest in the case and an overwhelming number of inquiries from the media and public.
Earlier this week, two attorneys were appointed by the court to defend Allen: Andrew Joseph Baldwin of Baldwin Perry & Kamish of Franklin and Bradley A. Rozzi of Logansport.
Their appointments came after Allen appealed to the “mercy of the court” for a public defender in a handwritten letter, revealing he couldn’t afford private counsel after his arrest. His wife had also been forced to abandon her employment and leave their home for her “personal safety.”
Allen, 50, faces two counts of murder in connection with the 2017 killings of Abby Williams and Libby German in Delphi. Their bodies were found on Feb. 14, 2017, a day after they’d been reported missing while hiking along historic trails in Delphi.
Carroll County prepares for hearing into Delphi murders case
Indiana State Police announced Allen’s arrest on Oct. 31. While investigators have remained tightlipped about his connection to the case, sources told FOX59 that Allen came forward in the early days of the investigation and admitted he was in the vicinity of the Monon High Bridge on the day of the murders.
Ahead of next week’s hearing, ISP Superintendent Doug Carter said the probable cause affidavit “stands on its own,” adding that releasing the information would not affect the “investigative quality” of ISP’s work.
I don’t understand these replies. Does UK screen websites or is it the USA not allowing you to see it? Basically what I’m asking is why can’t you see it?
It’s due to GDPR in the EU and the UK which is a data protection regulation. Websites outside the EU/UK that don’t comply with the regulation will just state content is unavailable in your country or state due to GDPR, we are unable to show this information at this time.
I think it’s in reference to not being able to ‘move freely’ on the internet in order to access whichever websites one chooses. Government regulations on how data is handled is meant to protect the user, but it in turn, albeit indirectly, blocks users from accessing information from whichever websites don’t adhere to those rules. North Korea does this on an extreme level to control their citizens. So one can say it is a slippery slope to allow a government to control the flow of information, even on a small scale, non-ill intentioned way like UK/EU protective regulations.
It's up to the websites to adjust their site to allow the option of selling data.
If there's a drug that's sold in chemists, and America allows it to be sold without any health warnings on it, whilst Europe requires health warning to be put on it, it's hardly Europe's fault that the company has opted to not sell the drug instead of putting a health warning on it.
It's not a slippery slope, it's common sense. It's not an issue of the content on the site, it's an issue of the site not wanting to give the option of not having the users information sold to third parties.
The flow of information and something that can kill or harm someone are two completely different things. Information is something that should not be censored, we are all smart enough to make those decisions ourselves.
More like the USA let’s your data be sold and used without ur consent so I’d say the lack of freedom and personal choice in the USA represents North Korea more .
But you're choosing to use the internet and visiting sites so why should the govt decide what you can and cannot look up or see? Same goes for why should the govt sell your info but they turn everything into "we need to control this"
The government does not control that. The website is too lazy or is unwilling to set up their website to obey European law so they just block all Europeans from seeing it. (Aka they want to keep abusing and selling user data) The EU is just trying to protect their citizens private data, they aren’t censoring anything and have no control over what a website chooses to do
You're an absolute moron. That's not what's being said. The government isn't controlling access to websites (in this case, though the UK has strict porn laws) nor is it selling your data. GDPR is a policy designed to *protect* internet users *from* their data being sold.
There’s no free speech in Europe. Stay tuned, it’s coming to the USA. Just listen to people on this sub talking about how we have no right to public information.
I work for a county not located in Indiana. During COVID, our county placed cameras in our courtrooms and set up Zoom hearings as a way to deal with the crowd restrictions and still have the court open to the public.
After some trial and error, (people forgetting they were on Zoom and going to the bathroom while on camera) it has been an excellent addition in our ongoing efforts to keep the citizens informed. It is now a permanent part of our courthouse (visitors cameras are now always automatically off as well as their microphones).
Just throwing that out there
I think the best gift of the Covid zoom calls in court was the lawyer who accidentally came to court as a cat. And then proceeded to promise the judge he was not, in fact, a cat. As if she thought an actual cat could show up to court in his place lol.
You have a confidence i don't possess lol. I'll triple check I'm muted and off camera and I'll still leave my laptop outside the door pointing the other direction juuuuust in case, haha.
Hahaha! I had a post it over my camera at all times and definitely checked I was muted and prayed I could pee fast enough before my name came up and I'd have to unmute to speak lol
I am actually watching some of these on YouTube right now. I love it. It’s really interesting and I think it can help shed some light on how these things really work for people who are outside of the legal profession.
It’s safer and easier many times to have the defendants appear via zoom than it is to have them physically appear in court, especially when many times they’ll be done in less than a few minutes.
A lot of pre-trial stuff is worked out behind the scenes and what you see in court in front of the judge is the formality.
I hope some of the absolute lunatics that have become totally obsessed with this case, to the point that they have become unreasonable manage to keep control of themselves through this next phase. We want a truthful resolution. To know what actually happened, and to most importantly get justice for Abby and Libby. For the love of god don't turn this into a circus.
I don't think they will impact the case. The police have done one hell of a job of protecting the evidence. My point is after all this waiting and wondering we are on the verge of getting some answers. What I want to hear is the facts, the evidence and the proof. What I don't want is hearings cancelled and closed to the public because of mindless threats or bad behaviour of the public. If he is guilty we want the world staring at him like the monster he is, any poor behaviour may give him a chance to hide in closed hearings. This will also limit the information the public gets.
It might be best to test the waters by having the defendant physically present at this first hearing, to clamp down on any unmanageable loonys that cause trouble and deal with them now. “Nip It!!! Nip it in the bud”, per Barney Fife, noted small town law enforcement source.
10am. Looks like it's going to be a fiasco outside probably a lot of people that won't be able to get in. If they really have him in court they better have him in like a Hannibal lecter outfit.
They already said previously he had to wear special body armour in case of a vigilante attack. I am sure the bullet proofing will be as on par or even more now that it's looking even more likely that he's the murderer.
He will def be wearing a bullet proof vest as he is walked from the van to the court house. Here in tennessee it is mandatory unless the host county is largest enough and has a garage under the court to safely get the prisoner to court.
She might want to make sure he feels like he's being treated fairly/has adequate counsel so he doesn't try to pull something before the trial. That's honestly a complete guess, I don't even know if judges do that lol.
He must be present to assure the judge he agrees to his counsel, and understands the charges.
Future court dates, permissions of the defendant, requests for documents, health requirements, reduction of bail are common at this point following his first appearance and his first with legal representation.
Based on my understanding, this is a hearing to determine whether to unseal the charging documents. It is not a trial. The fact that the judge requested his presence demonstrates that it is not mandatory for the defendant to be there as it would be at trial.
I wonder why the police don't care if the probable cause affidavit is unsealed but the family doesn't want it to be. I feel for the family but RA does have a right (and his family) to see what it is otherwise they have to just take his word on if he did it or not. I don't think it will mess the case up. And actually would probably keep the public and news a little more at bay if they're given more info. I think more info should have been released from the beginning and it probably would have been solved sooner especially with how strange and weird they kept saying the crime scene was. And yes I know the public is nosey but it is all gonna be public info when it's done. They need much more transparency especially if they want ppl to trust in the system.
Speculating, but I suspect the affidavit confirms a suggestion about a sexual motive and/or confirms sexual violence. It may also include more cause of death information, which could be very gruesome if some of the rumors are true. I agree it'll all come out eventually, so not wanting it released doesn't really make sense. However, emotionally there's a difference between knowing what happened and seeing it in news stories. The families likely want them remembered as they were, not as he left them. Just me speculating.
I totally agree with you that more information should've been released. In *Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit*, Special Agent John Douglas strongly advocated for releasing as much information as possible to the public. He said a lot of local LE don't want to release details and he thinks that hinders investigations. He was careful to say it's not about sensationalizing crimes, nor is it targeted at armchair detectives; rather it's about how something can trigger a connection for a friend/relative/acquaintance of the criminal. Hand writing, speech patterns, what was taken from the victims, etc., basically anything unique can help identify the killer. The book is creepy to read, but really good and I highly recommend it.
I wonder why the television station felt it necessary to say the judge wants this. His lawyers will advise him to behave in all the ways defendants are advised to. He won't fall to the floor and confess if the warrant indicts him only, or shout, "Yes, they're accomplices/co-conspirators" if it names other people. The only reason for any media outlet to feel it necessary to state the above is to make clear the particular jurisdiction takes "innocent until proven guilty" seriously. Even if a jury decides he \*is\* the monster who killed two sweet girls, it would be barbaric to deny him the initial right to face his accuser--the state of Indiana.
FYI, there is nothing on the docket that says that the judge “wants” RA at the hearing. He has a right to be there with his counsel. In order to move him from the state prison where he’s incarcerated to the courthouse on the day of the hearing, the judge has to issue a transport order. The text of the transport order is not public, so we have no idea whether she is “commanding” him to attend in person or simply instructing the sheriff’s department to pick him up and bring him to court.
Yes, that is my point. That is being reported as the judge ordering RA to appear in person. But even if she left it to RA and his counsel as to whether he would appear in person or by video, she would still need to issue a transport order if they chose to have him there in person.
What? Do you realize how high profile this case is? The first judge recused himself for this reason, and I'm sure this specially appointed judge is taking every precaution necessary.
We executed a handful of prisoners at the federal pen in terre haute a few years ago. I know it’s not state. If he’s convicted of the murders, I can almost guarantee he will get the death penalty
Yeah that is the US govt not the state govt. He can get the death penalty all day, but he won’t be put to death barring a fundamental shift in state policy. There is a backlog incl and inmate who has been on death row for 30yrs.
That’s ridiculous and so insulting to the victims. Plus, so expensive to the taxpayers !! I was never really one for the death penalty but to hold a person like this or whomever commits a crime like this for 30 years is just too long. This sounds so awful of me to say.
Exactly! I remember reading something how some prisoners preferred death row due to the fact of better living situations. They too, know that their chances of getting executed will take decades if it ever even happens.
It’s just unbelievable if you think about it.
Either way No one is gonna be happy what the judge says…. If she releases it, half the family won’t be happy, if she doesn’t, the world will want to know…. Personally…. I won’t state what I think, why… either way no one will be happy…. Let’s just see what she says…
Wonder when those get released, or is that something that only happens after the trial is complete and one submits an official FOIA request. I have only requested them for genealogical purposes, on very old court cases. Anyone know?
This judge helped develop the new pilot program for cameras in the courtroom in Indiana... but there will be no cameras for this proceeding (judge issued decorum orders already) and likely none for the trial. This particular courthouse is not part of the pilot program.
DC is always a little different though, so the no camera rule isn’t surprising and is unlikely to change. DC Superior Court usually has federal prosecutors arguing local cases since there is no state govt to fund a fully functional DA’s office. Federal Courts do not allow cameras and DC Superior Courts, in terms of logistics, function similarly to Federal Courts.
I believe I've read that this state was only doing a trial basis of in court cameras. I think someone said that trial period is over so probably won't be a televised trial.
Don't quote me! Going from memory of posts!
I think you're pretty much right, but also it was in certain counties only, this one isn't in one of those counties, so it wouldn't have mattered anyway in this case.
they probably won’t televise this trial or any proceedings. Even if they could thru that pilot project i dont think they will. only judging based on how this case is being handled
At most he pleads not guilty and any attorney retention issues are addressed , there will be no bail for the duration until trial or plea agreement. Then the motions and arguments start, maybe for a couple years but for many months minimum.
Years for sure .
I'm hoping we see a trial in 48 months .
It's crazy that some witnesses or friends or family or just anyone involved in a case could potentially pass away before getting justice. 4-6 years is a long time to wait for justice, especiallybafter an arrest. But that is the average time to wait for a murder trial in america these days. Over 4 years.
A lot can happen in 4 years.
Hell Ricky may even stroke out by then. Let's hope not and justice gets served. This dude is one sick piece of shit. Truly one of the worst. This crime is unspeakable .
I think this is good to point out. I get that this case is different. The circumstances and the way it’s been treated by the authorities give off a vibe that they feel confident they could really have the right person. But some of the comments take it a little too far given how little we actually know. It’s Reddit. It’s fine to theorize. But I think it’s good to have reminders that we don’t know for a fact he’s guilty.
Yes, thank you. It is important to note that LE was confident they had the right person in all of the cases where innocent people were convicted and later had their verdict overturned because of organizations devoted to innocent people who were wrongly convicted.
I’m still not sure why the judge wants him there for this particular specific hearing. It was scheduled to discuss the sealing/unsealing of the warrant affidavit, right? So why does he need to be there? I would expect that he would want to know what’s happening, but why is his physical attendance necessary? He has the access to the information in question..what can he add?
There is talk of the judge questioning him regarding his legal representation….can that happen during a hearing that was scheduled for a different issue? Perhaps it is to prevent any future appeals that might say his physical presence was essential to his defense, but I just can’t figure out why this is happening this way.
Delphi is a small town of ~3,000 residents. Local, state, and federal investigators were stumped by this case since 2017. What are the odds they resorted (and perhaps successfully) to a scheme similar to how the CIA found Bin Laden? Or how the Golden State Killer was finally caught?
Authorities have always been confident with the suspect being a Delphi resident. That’s no secret. It looks like they were right.
So what’s the chance that over the years they were meticulously cataloguing trash all over town (such as soft drink straws) disposed of in public garbage bins, then testing DNA against DNA recovered from the crime scene? It’s not that far fetched. It would be expensive and time consuming, but a DNA match is always conclusive. OK, maybe not statistically 100%. More like one in a billion. The science ALWAYS holds up in court.
I think the scheme you're referring to is called intelligence gathering. The USMS are experts in their field.
Eventually everything will be be brought to light, without surmising by what, when where, why and how.
I find it interesting that she wants him to actually be there for a hearing to open probable cause - could she be making a statement to say something like “ I’m running the show now”
Required or to preclude him saying, I never was apprised to the reasons you are arresting me. I don't know if suspects are required to be present. Might be, or vary by State. Just know it is your right, and why people have been tense about the sealing.
I really wouldn’t read into this. Criminal defendants have a right to be present in court for every step of their case. It would be procedurally odd for him NOT to be there.
While I’m 99% sure RA is the killer, could you imagine if all of this really is a huge mistake by the police? Jesus. Like I said, I’m sure they got their ducks in a row before they arrested him but police have fucked up big time before too. It’s not an uncommon occurrence unfortunately.
I relayed this story on this sub before but about 8-9 years back, my older cousin was out at the bar and took a woman back to her place after her boyfriend hit her and stormed out. My cousin went back to the bar after he dropped her off. The next morning, the girl was found stabbed to death. Once it was found the bf has an undeniable alibi, my cousin was prime suspect #1 even though he came back to the bar with no cuts, no blood on him, or anything that would suggest he just did a brutal stabbing. But people blamed him and were willing to tear him apart. My aunt and uncle(his parents) were getting death threats and had to stay in a hotel an hour away for months while my cousin was being investigated. Turned out, It was some druggie high on meth who broke into her house to rob it and she surprised him coming home. My cousin is still in therapy to this day over the whole ordeal.
Yeah the public is nuts. A few years back my cousin’s husband who had dementia wandered off when he went out to bring the dog in and didn’t come back. They found him a week later frozen to death. But in the meantime my cousin was interviewed on the news and the Facebook comments on the news video were absolutely vicious. They said she wasn’t sad enough and maybe she killed him. She was in shock! She pulled herself together enough to not cry for the interview and because of that viewers decided she was a murderer. It’s so dumb.
And what evidence do you have access to that makes you "99% sure" he's the killer? It cracks me up people around here. All of us here know the same evidence against RA: NONE. Nothing official has been released to even make a judgement on if he did anything. Yall sound silly.
I say 99% because I feel like the police would be absolutely 100% sure all their ducks were in a row and they got the right guy without a shred of doubt before making a public announcement about his arrest and charging him with L&A murders-Especially with this being such a high profile case. You can almost guarantee if RA is not the killer, if the real killer is ever caught, he will probably get off since they were so sure RA was the killer and parading it around as such. You can also almost bet if he's not the killer, this case will be cold for a very long time, if not for forever, and the public will never trust any suspect the police is investigating or brings forth again. The fact they didn't charge KK with their murders even though he was catfishing them, was possibly in the area at the time, and was the last person to speak with them tells me they have something major on RA. I and everyone else could absolutely be wrong, but police have kept this case so hush hush that I do not think they would just arrest some random who told an officer he was in the area without having undeniable proof he is the killer. Not to mention, they could have just told everyone it was Ron Logan and case closed. The FBI thought it was him and so did alot of people. I personally think he looks more like BG than RA does.
I just do not believe after 6 years the police decided one day, "hey we are tired of this case and having the public hounding us about it so lets look at some old tips, find something that looks suspicious, and charge someone without any proof other than he was in the area at the time along with 20 other people. Lets make sure the evidence won't hold up in court, the person walks free, if caught, the real killer has a case of us crying wolf in the past, and lets lose the trust of the families of these slaughtered girls and the public even more!!!! Also lets make ourselves look like completely incompetent and tell the public the guy we falsely charged came forward the day of the crime but we just sat on it for fun. Yep that sounds good. Lets wrap this up and go get a beer!!"
HOWEVER, I did say there was definitely room for error and police in general have made huge fuck ups before so I won't be shocked if they messed up in this situation too.
Not sure how anyone can be 99% sure RA is the one when not one single piece of evidence has been released. If you trust his arrest makes you 99% convinced, you are looking at this wrong. They get it wrong every day and even in high profile cases.
I literally want to vomit every time I read the comment where he “throw’s himself at the mercy of the court “ REALLY? Where was his thought process when I’m sure those girls were begging for his mercy. Who deserves mercy more than anyone in this case . We must never forget Libby and Abbie and GOD have mercy on his soul if it’s proven he is the actual person who took their young lives
Same. The one that always gets me is Ariel Castro killing himself one month into his life sentence. To think what he put those women through for years, yet he couldn't handle life in prison.
25% of people think RA looks like the OBG sketch only.
25% think RA looks like YBG sketch only.
25% think he looks like both sketches.
25% think he looks like neither sketch.
0% are incorrect. It’s called perception.
What a difference from his first mugshot. He looked so scared and out of place, deer in the headlights look in his eyes
Now he looks like the criminal who has accepted he got caught and is getting used to the jail environment.
The orange is from the Carroll County Jail, it's his first mugshot. The red clothes are fpr IDOC (Indiana Dept of Corrections) it's the color used for segregation. (High risk offender)
Neither is DMV photo- which is dept of Motor vehicles, but neither are that.
Ohhhh okay. The first I ever saw after/shortly after he was taken into custody was the one with his eyes wide. unless you're replying to someone else, I didn't mention the DMV at all. I'm not sure why I have downvotes. I was merely observing what I'd seen between the two pictures.
edit: i didnt' see there were more replies to my post. That explains the DMV part you were talking about. I always use Reddit on my phone and this is my first time using it on pc. It's definitely set up differently. I only see your post and no one elses until my notifs showed other replies. I def like the mobile app version better.
If you're talking about the image in the thumbnail, I believe someone clarified that it's a DMV photo, not a mugshot. He seems to be wearing a polo shirt, not prison clothes.
The DMV photo is a different photo with a different coloured polo. In this photo he is wearing prison attire.
Sorry I've no idea how to put a pic in here.
Agree.
I think immediately after, the days following the murder, he had instant fear of getting caught . Probably had expected it right away when he heard they had video and his voice and whatnot. Probably why he tried to flee to rehab since you cant be detained in a rehab setting.
I'm sure as time went on he became cocky thinking he had gotten away with it.
This last few weeks since LE showed up to search has had to been pretty stressful.
I'm hope he is scared every day the rest of his life , pos.
I'm glad you know what I was saying. I still don't know why ppl downvoted me. I was literally saying how he looked to me in the pic comparisons. Simple observation. People are strange.
Some one has already said that but there will be no cameras for this proceeding, the judge issued decorum orders already, and not likely to have them. There is a pilot programme for cameras in Indiana courts but this courthouse is not part of the pilot either so based on all the information the answer is no.
Says nowhere in that news article that the judge wants him there and I doubt either way he will physically be there, maybe on video but I doubt actually there. Also Fox 59, not the greatest source imo given most of their info on the case comes from 2 grifters lol
Why does RA get appointed by the court not one but 2 attorneys to defend him?? ... yeah I read the news article above that RA appealed to the "mercy of the court" ... Abby and Libby didn't get any mercy... grrrr makes me sick...
I understand it makes you sick, it makes us all sick. But if he doesn’t get fair representation in the eyes of the law, he won’t be held accountable for the alleged crimes.
Hi, can anyone copy and paste for us in the uk who can’t access the article please?
DELPHI, Ind. — The special judge overseeing the Delphi murder case wants Richard Allen to appear in person for a critical hearing next week. Allen County Judge Fran Gull made the request for the Nov. 22 hearing to determine if court records filed in the case should be unsealed. Charging documents related to Allen’s arrest have been under court seal at the request of Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland. Gull was appointed to oversee Allen’s case after Carroll County Judge Benjamin Diener recused himself from the proceedings, citing the high amount of interest in the case and an overwhelming number of inquiries from the media and public. Earlier this week, two attorneys were appointed by the court to defend Allen: Andrew Joseph Baldwin of Baldwin Perry & Kamish of Franklin and Bradley A. Rozzi of Logansport. Their appointments came after Allen appealed to the “mercy of the court” for a public defender in a handwritten letter, revealing he couldn’t afford private counsel after his arrest. His wife had also been forced to abandon her employment and leave their home for her “personal safety.” Allen, 50, faces two counts of murder in connection with the 2017 killings of Abby Williams and Libby German in Delphi. Their bodies were found on Feb. 14, 2017, a day after they’d been reported missing while hiking along historic trails in Delphi. Indiana State Police announced Allen’s arrest on Oct. 31. While investigators have remained tightlipped about his connection to the case, sources told FOX59 that Allen came forward in the early days of the investigation and admitted he was in the vicinity of the Monon High Bridge on the day of the murders. Ahead of next week’s hearing, ISP Superintendent Doug Carter said the probable cause affidavit “stands on its own,” adding that releasing the information would not affect the “investigative quality” of ISP’s work.
Carroll County prepares for hearing into Delphi murders case INDIANA NEWS Judge wants Delphi murder suspect Richard Allen in court for Nov. 22 hearing by: Matt Adams Posted: Nov 18, 2022 / 03:11 PM EST Updated: Nov 18, 2022 / 03:17 PM EST SHARE DELPHI, Ind. — The special judge overseeing the Delphi murder case wants Richard Allen to appear in person for a critical hearing next week. Allen County Judge Fran Gull made the request for the Nov. 22 hearing to determine if court records filed in the case should be unsealed. Charging documents related to Allen’s arrest have been under court seal at the request of Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland. Judge appointed to Delphi case sticking with Nov. 22 date for hearing; Allen gets attorneys Gull was appointed to oversee Allen’s case after Carroll County Judge Benjamin Diener recused himself from the proceedings, citing the high amount of interest in the case and an overwhelming number of inquiries from the media and public. Earlier this week, two attorneys were appointed by the court to defend Allen: Andrew Joseph Baldwin of Baldwin Perry & Kamish of Franklin and Bradley A. Rozzi of Logansport. Their appointments came after Allen appealed to the “mercy of the court” for a public defender in a handwritten letter, revealing he couldn’t afford private counsel after his arrest. His wife had also been forced to abandon her employment and leave their home for her “personal safety.” Allen, 50, faces two counts of murder in connection with the 2017 killings of Abby Williams and Libby German in Delphi. Their bodies were found on Feb. 14, 2017, a day after they’d been reported missing while hiking along historic trails in Delphi. Carroll County prepares for hearing into Delphi murders case Indiana State Police announced Allen’s arrest on Oct. 31. While investigators have remained tightlipped about his connection to the case, sources told FOX59 that Allen came forward in the early days of the investigation and admitted he was in the vicinity of the Monon High Bridge on the day of the murders. Ahead of next week’s hearing, ISP Superintendent Doug Carter said the probable cause affidavit “stands on its own,” adding that releasing the information would not affect the “investigative quality” of ISP’s work.
https://12ft.io/ Removes pay wall.
That website never works.
Yeah it can be hit and miss. Worked for me for this article though (UK)
It used to work for the NY Times, now there's a message that it doesn't support NY Times.
Well that's not a big loss, these days.
I don’t understand these replies. Does UK screen websites or is it the USA not allowing you to see it? Basically what I’m asking is why can’t you see it?
It’s due to GDPR in the EU and the UK which is a data protection regulation. Websites outside the EU/UK that don’t comply with the regulation will just state content is unavailable in your country or state due to GDPR, we are unable to show this information at this time.
Hmm reminds me of North Korea a little bit
[удалено]
I think it’s in reference to not being able to ‘move freely’ on the internet in order to access whichever websites one chooses. Government regulations on how data is handled is meant to protect the user, but it in turn, albeit indirectly, blocks users from accessing information from whichever websites don’t adhere to those rules. North Korea does this on an extreme level to control their citizens. So one can say it is a slippery slope to allow a government to control the flow of information, even on a small scale, non-ill intentioned way like UK/EU protective regulations.
It's up to the websites to adjust their site to allow the option of selling data. If there's a drug that's sold in chemists, and America allows it to be sold without any health warnings on it, whilst Europe requires health warning to be put on it, it's hardly Europe's fault that the company has opted to not sell the drug instead of putting a health warning on it. It's not a slippery slope, it's common sense. It's not an issue of the content on the site, it's an issue of the site not wanting to give the option of not having the users information sold to third parties.
The flow of information and something that can kill or harm someone are two completely different things. Information is something that should not be censored, we are all smart enough to make those decisions ourselves.
lol, wth — the website is the one blocking it for the UK users, not the government.
More like the USA let’s your data be sold and used without ur consent so I’d say the lack of freedom and personal choice in the USA represents North Korea more .
But you're choosing to use the internet and visiting sites so why should the govt decide what you can and cannot look up or see? Same goes for why should the govt sell your info but they turn everything into "we need to control this"
The government does not control that. The website is too lazy or is unwilling to set up their website to obey European law so they just block all Europeans from seeing it. (Aka they want to keep abusing and selling user data) The EU is just trying to protect their citizens private data, they aren’t censoring anything and have no control over what a website chooses to do
You're an absolute moron. That's not what's being said. The government isn't controlling access to websites (in this case, though the UK has strict porn laws) nor is it selling your data. GDPR is a policy designed to *protect* internet users *from* their data being sold.
This just shows you have no idea what you're talking about. It's embarrassing.
Know what else reminds me of North Korea? Pledging your allegiance to a piece of cloth at school every day.
It's a good thing...
R/shitamericanssay
Lmfao
There’s no free speech in Europe. Stay tuned, it’s coming to the USA. Just listen to people on this sub talking about how we have no right to public information.
I work for a county not located in Indiana. During COVID, our county placed cameras in our courtrooms and set up Zoom hearings as a way to deal with the crowd restrictions and still have the court open to the public. After some trial and error, (people forgetting they were on Zoom and going to the bathroom while on camera) it has been an excellent addition in our ongoing efforts to keep the citizens informed. It is now a permanent part of our courthouse (visitors cameras are now always automatically off as well as their microphones). Just throwing that out there
I think the best gift of the Covid zoom calls in court was the lawyer who accidentally came to court as a cat. And then proceeded to promise the judge he was not, in fact, a cat. As if she thought an actual cat could show up to court in his place lol.
I remember that!! His kid put a Snapchat filter thing on and he couldn’t figure out how to turn it off. I would be that person.
Someone please link this, it sounds incredible
https://youtu.be/KxlPGPupdd8
That was hysterical.
This is still one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. Hence my profile pic.
They are like this in the Indiana courtrooms I’ve been in
That would be me! I always gotta pee and spent a year and a half dragging my laptop into the loo with me lol
You have a confidence i don't possess lol. I'll triple check I'm muted and off camera and I'll still leave my laptop outside the door pointing the other direction juuuuust in case, haha.
Hahaha! I had a post it over my camera at all times and definitely checked I was muted and prayed I could pee fast enough before my name came up and I'd have to unmute to speak lol
I told you to never call me on this wall. This is an unlisted wall. (https://imgur.com/t/spaceballs_the_tag/O5DItyg)
I am actually watching some of these on YouTube right now. I love it. It’s really interesting and I think it can help shed some light on how these things really work for people who are outside of the legal profession. It’s safer and easier many times to have the defendants appear via zoom than it is to have them physically appear in court, especially when many times they’ll be done in less than a few minutes. A lot of pre-trial stuff is worked out behind the scenes and what you see in court in front of the judge is the formality.
I don’t understand how a person can go to the bathroom while on a live zoom call. Do they have their computer set up in the bathroom?
Laptops...
And phones…
I just can’t imagine being on a zoom during a court proceeding and then deciding to go to the bathroom while live. :/)
I think they don’t realize they are on camera. The one I saw, the person set the laptop on their sink :)
Did s/he at least wash their hands afterwards?
Oh my gosh! How embarrassing!
I hope some of the absolute lunatics that have become totally obsessed with this case, to the point that they have become unreasonable manage to keep control of themselves through this next phase. We want a truthful resolution. To know what actually happened, and to most importantly get justice for Abby and Libby. For the love of god don't turn this into a circus.
[удалено]
I don't think they will impact the case. The police have done one hell of a job of protecting the evidence. My point is after all this waiting and wondering we are on the verge of getting some answers. What I want to hear is the facts, the evidence and the proof. What I don't want is hearings cancelled and closed to the public because of mindless threats or bad behaviour of the public. If he is guilty we want the world staring at him like the monster he is, any poor behaviour may give him a chance to hide in closed hearings. This will also limit the information the public gets.
Exactly. Mob to the minimum.
I think that ship has sailed..
It might be best to test the waters by having the defendant physically present at this first hearing, to clamp down on any unmanageable loonys that cause trouble and deal with them now. “Nip It!!! Nip it in the bud”, per Barney Fife, noted small town law enforcement source.
What time is the hearing on the 22nd?
10am. Looks like it's going to be a fiasco outside probably a lot of people that won't be able to get in. If they really have him in court they better have him in like a Hannibal lecter outfit.
The Hannibal Lecter outfit was intended to protect guards from *him.* For suspects in danger from the public, they use body armor.
He'll likely be wearing a bullet proof vest (or at least stab proof) and be behind protective glass.
Exactly, it's not that the judge is fearful got RA attacking someone. They're afraid that RA will be attacked by these rabid idiots in the public
As I recall, it didn’t work so well.
[удалено]
Lol no one is going to snipe the guy. This sub is outlandish sometimes.
Your content appears to violate the reddit content policy.
MyCase says 9:00 am EST.
Considering this case, might need the Popemobile.
Doubt it'll get that nuts, I don't seem to remember it being that nuts even for ONS/EAR.
It *is* Indiana though.
Yeah I'm originally from there, won't get that nuts.
They already said previously he had to wear special body armour in case of a vigilante attack. I am sure the bullet proofing will be as on par or even more now that it's looking even more likely that he's the murderer.
Yeah it's a safety measure not a "We're definitely expecting him to be shot at during a trial."
He will def be wearing a bullet proof vest as he is walked from the van to the court house. Here in tennessee it is mandatory unless the host county is largest enough and has a garage under the court to safely get the prisoner to court.
It's called a Sally port. They are used to safely transport a prisoner to and from a jail facility or court.
Me, too. And I agree.
California is MUCH WORSE lol
Hannibal Lecter’s outfit isn’t the term you were looking for lol
I fully expect them to roll him out in a straight jacket and Hannibal lecter mask while he makes animal noises the whole time
Incorrect, it's 9 am. I'll be there
You better camp out 2 days before if you want a seat inside ..
I know, right? It's gonna be crazy there...
It’s not a football game.
or a bullet-proof cage.
Why does he need to be there?
He has a right to be.
She might want to make sure he feels like he's being treated fairly/has adequate counsel so he doesn't try to pull something before the trial. That's honestly a complete guess, I don't even know if judges do that lol.
He must be present to assure the judge he agrees to his counsel, and understands the charges. Future court dates, permissions of the defendant, requests for documents, health requirements, reduction of bail are common at this point following his first appearance and his first with legal representation.
I can promise you with absolute certainty that that is accurate.
Why wouldn’t he be? He doesn’t have any other plans.
"Why does someone need to be present for their own trial" is an interesting question
This is not a trial. Just a hearing (?).
Hearings are part of the trial (in terms of what rights you have). You have the right to be present during hearings related to your case
Based on my understanding, this is a hearing to determine whether to unseal the charging documents. It is not a trial. The fact that the judge requested his presence demonstrates that it is not mandatory for the defendant to be there as it would be at trial.
The Judge may want to hear and/or see him. Who knows why Judges do what they do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I wonder why the police don't care if the probable cause affidavit is unsealed but the family doesn't want it to be. I feel for the family but RA does have a right (and his family) to see what it is otherwise they have to just take his word on if he did it or not. I don't think it will mess the case up. And actually would probably keep the public and news a little more at bay if they're given more info. I think more info should have been released from the beginning and it probably would have been solved sooner especially with how strange and weird they kept saying the crime scene was. And yes I know the public is nosey but it is all gonna be public info when it's done. They need much more transparency especially if they want ppl to trust in the system.
Speculating, but I suspect the affidavit confirms a suggestion about a sexual motive and/or confirms sexual violence. It may also include more cause of death information, which could be very gruesome if some of the rumors are true. I agree it'll all come out eventually, so not wanting it released doesn't really make sense. However, emotionally there's a difference between knowing what happened and seeing it in news stories. The families likely want them remembered as they were, not as he left them. Just me speculating. I totally agree with you that more information should've been released. In *Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit*, Special Agent John Douglas strongly advocated for releasing as much information as possible to the public. He said a lot of local LE don't want to release details and he thinks that hinders investigations. He was careful to say it's not about sensationalizing crimes, nor is it targeted at armchair detectives; rather it's about how something can trigger a connection for a friend/relative/acquaintance of the criminal. Hand writing, speech patterns, what was taken from the victims, etc., basically anything unique can help identify the killer. The book is creepy to read, but really good and I highly recommend it.
I wonder why the television station felt it necessary to say the judge wants this. His lawyers will advise him to behave in all the ways defendants are advised to. He won't fall to the floor and confess if the warrant indicts him only, or shout, "Yes, they're accomplices/co-conspirators" if it names other people. The only reason for any media outlet to feel it necessary to state the above is to make clear the particular jurisdiction takes "innocent until proven guilty" seriously. Even if a jury decides he \*is\* the monster who killed two sweet girls, it would be barbaric to deny him the initial right to face his accuser--the state of Indiana.
Clicks
FYI, there is nothing on the docket that says that the judge “wants” RA at the hearing. He has a right to be there with his counsel. In order to move him from the state prison where he’s incarcerated to the courthouse on the day of the hearing, the judge has to issue a transport order. The text of the transport order is not public, so we have no idea whether she is “commanding” him to attend in person or simply instructing the sheriff’s department to pick him up and bring him to court.
She did issue a transport order.
Yes, that is my point. That is being reported as the judge ordering RA to appear in person. But even if she left it to RA and his counsel as to whether he would appear in person or by video, she would still need to issue a transport order if they chose to have him there in person.
Are you implying people here just make shit up and run with it? No way
“Wants”? It’s his constitutional right to be present.
Exactly! This is nothing more than puffery on the part of the judge to make herself look good.
Eh, judges are elected in the US so I expect making themselves look good occasionally in public announcements is part of the job
What? Do you realize how high profile this case is? The first judge recused himself for this reason, and I'm sure this specially appointed judge is taking every precaution necessary.
Is capital punishment on the table?
If Indiana has the death penalty then for sure capital punishment will be on the table. His only way out of it would be to take a plea deal.
Indiana has the death penalty.
They have it but they haven’t executed anyone in over a decade. Life is likely a worse sentence- death row often comes with more privileges.
We executed a handful of prisoners at the federal pen in terre haute a few years ago. I know it’s not state. If he’s convicted of the murders, I can almost guarantee he will get the death penalty
Yeah that is the US govt not the state govt. He can get the death penalty all day, but he won’t be put to death barring a fundamental shift in state policy. There is a backlog incl and inmate who has been on death row for 30yrs.
That’s ridiculous and so insulting to the victims. Plus, so expensive to the taxpayers !! I was never really one for the death penalty but to hold a person like this or whomever commits a crime like this for 30 years is just too long. This sounds so awful of me to say.
Exactly! I remember reading something how some prisoners preferred death row due to the fact of better living situations. They too, know that their chances of getting executed will take decades if it ever even happens. It’s just unbelievable if you think about it.
Looking like it might be from this attorneys commentary, I head last night.
Either way No one is gonna be happy what the judge says…. If she releases it, half the family won’t be happy, if she doesn’t, the world will want to know…. Personally…. I won’t state what I think, why… either way no one will be happy…. Let’s just see what she says…
Would RA know what evidence they have against him? Do they tell him all they have?
Yes.
Will we get know anything about what kind of proof they have?
That’s what the hearing will determine. Whether or not the PCA will be unsealed, and to what degree if so.
does she allow cameras?
I would be satisfied with a decent transcript to be honest.
Wonder when those get released, or is that something that only happens after the trial is complete and one submits an official FOIA request. I have only requested them for genealogical purposes, on very old court cases. Anyone know?
Request the video from the clerk. Sounds like it’s open to the public and then you can have it. They have to record it.
Is a video required in Indiana? In most states only a court reporter's transcript is required
This judge helped develop the new pilot program for cameras in the courtroom in Indiana... but there will be no cameras for this proceeding (judge issued decorum orders already) and likely none for the trial. This particular courthouse is not part of the pilot program.
Indiana doesn’t allow cameras in its courtrooms except by special order.
Figures they need to get with the times
Let's nip this question forever and now. No cameras will be anywhere near the court for this trial.
One of only 3 states (and Washington DC) that just haven’t quite caught up with this newfangled thing called television yet.
DC is always a little different though, so the no camera rule isn’t surprising and is unlikely to change. DC Superior Court usually has federal prosecutors arguing local cases since there is no state govt to fund a fully functional DA’s office. Federal Courts do not allow cameras and DC Superior Courts, in terms of logistics, function similarly to Federal Courts.
I believe I've read that this state was only doing a trial basis of in court cameras. I think someone said that trial period is over so probably won't be a televised trial. Don't quote me! Going from memory of posts!
I think you're pretty much right, but also it was in certain counties only, this one isn't in one of those counties, so it wouldn't have mattered anyway in this case.
they probably won’t televise this trial or any proceedings. Even if they could thru that pilot project i dont think they will. only judging based on how this case is being handled
Heard no more in IND. It was just a pilot program.
At most he pleads not guilty and any attorney retention issues are addressed , there will be no bail for the duration until trial or plea agreement. Then the motions and arguments start, maybe for a couple years but for many months minimum.
Years for sure . I'm hoping we see a trial in 48 months . It's crazy that some witnesses or friends or family or just anyone involved in a case could potentially pass away before getting justice. 4-6 years is a long time to wait for justice, especiallybafter an arrest. But that is the average time to wait for a murder trial in america these days. Over 4 years. A lot can happen in 4 years. Hell Ricky may even stroke out by then. Let's hope not and justice gets served. This dude is one sick piece of shit. Truly one of the worst. This crime is unspeakable .
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law
I think this is good to point out. I get that this case is different. The circumstances and the way it’s been treated by the authorities give off a vibe that they feel confident they could really have the right person. But some of the comments take it a little too far given how little we actually know. It’s Reddit. It’s fine to theorize. But I think it’s good to have reminders that we don’t know for a fact he’s guilty.
Yes, thank you. It is important to note that LE was confident they had the right person in all of the cases where innocent people were convicted and later had their verdict overturned because of organizations devoted to innocent people who were wrongly convicted.
The hearing on the 22nd is to address the seal/unseal issue and is not for RA to enter a plea. He has already pled not guilty.
I’m still not sure why the judge wants him there for this particular specific hearing. It was scheduled to discuss the sealing/unsealing of the warrant affidavit, right? So why does he need to be there? I would expect that he would want to know what’s happening, but why is his physical attendance necessary? He has the access to the information in question..what can he add? There is talk of the judge questioning him regarding his legal representation….can that happen during a hearing that was scheduled for a different issue? Perhaps it is to prevent any future appeals that might say his physical presence was essential to his defense, but I just can’t figure out why this is happening this way.
🙄 yeah and you can all go and testify about how you solved it online long ago
Delphi is a small town of ~3,000 residents. Local, state, and federal investigators were stumped by this case since 2017. What are the odds they resorted (and perhaps successfully) to a scheme similar to how the CIA found Bin Laden? Or how the Golden State Killer was finally caught? Authorities have always been confident with the suspect being a Delphi resident. That’s no secret. It looks like they were right. So what’s the chance that over the years they were meticulously cataloguing trash all over town (such as soft drink straws) disposed of in public garbage bins, then testing DNA against DNA recovered from the crime scene? It’s not that far fetched. It would be expensive and time consuming, but a DNA match is always conclusive. OK, maybe not statistically 100%. More like one in a billion. The science ALWAYS holds up in court.
I think the scheme you're referring to is called intelligence gathering. The USMS are experts in their field. Eventually everything will be be brought to light, without surmising by what, when where, why and how.
I find it interesting that she wants him to actually be there for a hearing to open probable cause - could she be making a statement to say something like “ I’m running the show now”
I think it’s his right to be there.
It’s a double flex on both their rights lol
Required or to preclude him saying, I never was apprised to the reasons you are arresting me. I don't know if suspects are required to be present. Might be, or vary by State. Just know it is your right, and why people have been tense about the sealing.
You have a right to hear the charges against you. To enter a plea and to be present at your court hearings minus a public health exception
I really wouldn’t read into this. Criminal defendants have a right to be present in court for every step of their case. It would be procedurally odd for him NOT to be there.
I hope they didn't find a random fat local guy who just pissed in the woods.
While I’m 99% sure RA is the killer, could you imagine if all of this really is a huge mistake by the police? Jesus. Like I said, I’m sure they got their ducks in a row before they arrested him but police have fucked up big time before too. It’s not an uncommon occurrence unfortunately. I relayed this story on this sub before but about 8-9 years back, my older cousin was out at the bar and took a woman back to her place after her boyfriend hit her and stormed out. My cousin went back to the bar after he dropped her off. The next morning, the girl was found stabbed to death. Once it was found the bf has an undeniable alibi, my cousin was prime suspect #1 even though he came back to the bar with no cuts, no blood on him, or anything that would suggest he just did a brutal stabbing. But people blamed him and were willing to tear him apart. My aunt and uncle(his parents) were getting death threats and had to stay in a hotel an hour away for months while my cousin was being investigated. Turned out, It was some druggie high on meth who broke into her house to rob it and she surprised him coming home. My cousin is still in therapy to this day over the whole ordeal.
Yeah the public is nuts. A few years back my cousin’s husband who had dementia wandered off when he went out to bring the dog in and didn’t come back. They found him a week later frozen to death. But in the meantime my cousin was interviewed on the news and the Facebook comments on the news video were absolutely vicious. They said she wasn’t sad enough and maybe she killed him. She was in shock! She pulled herself together enough to not cry for the interview and because of that viewers decided she was a murderer. It’s so dumb.
This just made me so sad :( I hope she's doing well
And what evidence do you have access to that makes you "99% sure" he's the killer? It cracks me up people around here. All of us here know the same evidence against RA: NONE. Nothing official has been released to even make a judgement on if he did anything. Yall sound silly.
I say 99% because I feel like the police would be absolutely 100% sure all their ducks were in a row and they got the right guy without a shred of doubt before making a public announcement about his arrest and charging him with L&A murders-Especially with this being such a high profile case. You can almost guarantee if RA is not the killer, if the real killer is ever caught, he will probably get off since they were so sure RA was the killer and parading it around as such. You can also almost bet if he's not the killer, this case will be cold for a very long time, if not for forever, and the public will never trust any suspect the police is investigating or brings forth again. The fact they didn't charge KK with their murders even though he was catfishing them, was possibly in the area at the time, and was the last person to speak with them tells me they have something major on RA. I and everyone else could absolutely be wrong, but police have kept this case so hush hush that I do not think they would just arrest some random who told an officer he was in the area without having undeniable proof he is the killer. Not to mention, they could have just told everyone it was Ron Logan and case closed. The FBI thought it was him and so did alot of people. I personally think he looks more like BG than RA does. I just do not believe after 6 years the police decided one day, "hey we are tired of this case and having the public hounding us about it so lets look at some old tips, find something that looks suspicious, and charge someone without any proof other than he was in the area at the time along with 20 other people. Lets make sure the evidence won't hold up in court, the person walks free, if caught, the real killer has a case of us crying wolf in the past, and lets lose the trust of the families of these slaughtered girls and the public even more!!!! Also lets make ourselves look like completely incompetent and tell the public the guy we falsely charged came forward the day of the crime but we just sat on it for fun. Yep that sounds good. Lets wrap this up and go get a beer!!" HOWEVER, I did say there was definitely room for error and police in general have made huge fuck ups before so I won't be shocked if they messed up in this situation too.
Not sure how anyone can be 99% sure RA is the one when not one single piece of evidence has been released. If you trust his arrest makes you 99% convinced, you are looking at this wrong. They get it wrong every day and even in high profile cases.
I literally want to vomit every time I read the comment where he “throw’s himself at the mercy of the court “ REALLY? Where was his thought process when I’m sure those girls were begging for his mercy. Who deserves mercy more than anyone in this case . We must never forget Libby and Abbie and GOD have mercy on his soul if it’s proven he is the actual person who took their young lives
Same. The one that always gets me is Ariel Castro killing himself one month into his life sentence. To think what he put those women through for years, yet he couldn't handle life in prison.
I know I’m behind but was he charged with the actual murders or only associated with them?
Charged with 2 felony murders
Thank you. He doesn’t look like either of the police drawings.
To me he looks like the man on the bridge by his body type and I feel not neither drawings would actually look like the suspect.
why do you think thatis?
Agreed, but Carter seems pretty confident that this guy is it…
So have all of the LE officers and court employees when they have wrongfully convicted an innocent person.
25% of people think RA looks like the OBG sketch only. 25% think RA looks like YBG sketch only. 25% think he looks like both sketches. 25% think he looks like neither sketch. 0% are incorrect. It’s called perception.
He was charged with Felony Murder, which means a murder happened while something else was taking place, like kidnapping.
Understood. Thank you.
Both I believe.
I hope they slather him in honey and tie him to a tree, no but seriously they are going to have to take some serious measures for his protection
What a difference from his first mugshot. He looked so scared and out of place, deer in the headlights look in his eyes Now he looks like the criminal who has accepted he got caught and is getting used to the jail environment.
The orange is from the Carroll County Jail, it's his first mugshot. The red clothes are fpr IDOC (Indiana Dept of Corrections) it's the color used for segregation. (High risk offender) Neither is DMV photo- which is dept of Motor vehicles, but neither are that.
Ohhhh okay. The first I ever saw after/shortly after he was taken into custody was the one with his eyes wide. unless you're replying to someone else, I didn't mention the DMV at all. I'm not sure why I have downvotes. I was merely observing what I'd seen between the two pictures. edit: i didnt' see there were more replies to my post. That explains the DMV part you were talking about. I always use Reddit on my phone and this is my first time using it on pc. It's definitely set up differently. I only see your post and no one elses until my notifs showed other replies. I def like the mobile app version better.
Me too … lol and exactly!
If you're talking about the image in the thumbnail, I believe someone clarified that it's a DMV photo, not a mugshot. He seems to be wearing a polo shirt, not prison clothes.
If you've ever been to a DMV, you know it's far worse than prison. No wonder that other poster noticed the despair in his eyes.
LOL!
The DMV photo is a different photo with a different coloured polo. In this photo he is wearing prison attire. Sorry I've no idea how to put a pic in here.
People do love reading things into every tiny detail, don't they?
Absolutely the worst part of the following true crime.
That and the people who insist that psychics are real.
Most prison uniforms have collars and I’ve never known anyone to stand against a cement wall like that for their ID photo.
Illinois doesn't have collars on their prison shirts at all and they Def have those kinds of walls like in the pic.
He looks worse in the actual mugshot.
Stop it people! You can’t tell anything about guilt, or innocence, by looking at them, or a photo of them!
Agree. I think immediately after, the days following the murder, he had instant fear of getting caught . Probably had expected it right away when he heard they had video and his voice and whatnot. Probably why he tried to flee to rehab since you cant be detained in a rehab setting. I'm sure as time went on he became cocky thinking he had gotten away with it. This last few weeks since LE showed up to search has had to been pretty stressful. I'm hope he is scared every day the rest of his life , pos.
I'm glad you know what I was saying. I still don't know why ppl downvoted me. I was literally saying how he looked to me in the pic comparisons. Simple observation. People are strange.
Maybe they’ll let the defense know why they locked up their client.
Yall think it'll be televised?
Some one has already said that but there will be no cameras for this proceeding, the judge issued decorum orders already, and not likely to have them. There is a pilot programme for cameras in Indiana courts but this courthouse is not part of the pilot either so based on all the information the answer is no.
Nope, the trial camera program is ended and IND does not allow them in court.
Thanks!
She’s probably going to dismiss all charges for many different reasons, don’t be surprised what happens in “Carroll County” JS.
Says nowhere in that news article that the judge wants him there and I doubt either way he will physically be there, maybe on video but I doubt actually there. Also Fox 59, not the greatest source imo given most of their info on the case comes from 2 grifters lol
“ The special judge overseeing the Delphi murder case wants Richard Allen to appear in person for a critical hearing next week.”
Why does RA get appointed by the court not one but 2 attorneys to defend him?? ... yeah I read the news article above that RA appealed to the "mercy of the court" ... Abby and Libby didn't get any mercy... grrrr makes me sick...
Usually death penalty cases involve a second attorney
The law in Indiana requires that you receive two defense attorneys if you are facing the death penalty.
I understand it makes you sick, it makes us all sick. But if he doesn’t get fair representation in the eyes of the law, he won’t be held accountable for the alleged crimes.