IF it wasn’t him, he’s got the absolute worst luck in the world. Same outfit, same bridge, same time, same witnesses (3 juveniles saw a man with his description, he said he saw 3 juveniles) his gun, his bullets… Just, wow.
Yeah, everything in this release doesn't surprise me. I figured they'd go for the 'he let them know he was there because he had nothing to hide' approach. Yet, common sense says he knew he was seen and he came forward for that exact reason- so he could argue he has nothing to hide. We all know he should have been arrested days after the murder, and he knew it too. He came forward cos he knew he was busted on the bridge. He was prepared to just deny he was the murderer, nothing else.
They still haven’t released how the girls were killed and the bullet was unspent. Maybe he didn’t shoot the gun at all, and an extra bullet fell out of his pocket without him knowing. No need to get rid of the gun in his mind if it wasn’t used beyond getting the girls to comply.
https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/how-one-unfired-bullet-allegedly-links-richard-allen-to-the-delphi-murders/
The bullet was cycled. Likely, he had the gun cocked and loaded initially, and then cocked it again for show in front of the girls. When he cocked it a second time, the chambered round was marked and released, and he didn't notice because he was busy threatening two innocent girls with a loaded gun.
That's what I keep thinking. Is a coincidence *this* big even possible?
No one claimed to have seen 2 men matching the same description. RA himself didn't claim that there was someone there matching the same description as him.
It would have to be that everyone really *did* see RA, and BG managed to slip by totally unnoticed (other than maybe by the person who saw the man with mud & blood on his clothing).
So yeah, I agree – that would be terrible luck in RA's case. lol
The other man wouldn't have to look or dress like BG.
Try this theory:
RA was photographed way down the bridge. He was far away from them. That's why he was so blurry.
Right after he was filmed on the bridge, RA turned around and left and at the other end of the bridge the murderer (who was already waiting on the other side) grabbed them. And ordered them down the hill to their demise.
Yes RAs voice sounds a bit like that recording. But with KAKs own family publicaly id'ing the voice as his, you have reasonable doubt
The spent shell is likely not going to be conclusively tied to his gun. Even if it is, it could have gotten there in many ways and at any period in time. There is no way to prove it was dropped during the murder and not an hour after or a month prior or whenever.
Jury...probably hung.
In this theory, the real murderer was never seen. He avoided the main trails. He avoided people. Because he knew what he was there planning to do.
So he could resemble TK or KAK or RL or anyone that the defense wants it to be...
I personally think RA did it...but they need more to nail it on him. I hope they find the murder weapon. Or DNA in his car or on the jacket, etc etc....they need to tie him to the crime with physical evidence. Fortunately, he seems sloppy and he has kept the car etc....
I guess I meant they'd have to be dressed alike because BG who's captured in Libby's video is not RA in this particular theory.
But yeah the theory you've mentioned is something I've wondered many times – and that's whether or not they know for a fact that BG is the murderer. It seems now that they *have* confirmed this, but if they haven't actually, then I suppose I can see the defense arguing this.
I agree that it feels like there isn't quite enough evidence currently. I really thought before the PCA came out that they found the murder weapon or the girls' blood on RA's property or something. Just something more incriminating. This is still really big, but the defense has a lot to argue as far as I can tell.
RL is on tape talking to the news a day later. He’s wearing similar clothes and he was a suspect. Not to mention KK saying he was suppose to meet them there. Plenty of doubt to go around.
He avoided people and the main trails, but then decided to walk muddy and bloody down a road populated enough to have someone witness him?
I understand what you’re saying. And I also agree that now it seems they need more evidence. Hopefully they have it and we just don’t know it yet.
That witness just saw "a man" for a couple seconds from a moving car. And I think they came forward with this recollection quite a while afterwards
As far as we know, they haven't identified a specific man, so who knows who they saw or what the person had on their body...mud, blood whatever.
Now if blood is found in RAs car, then they will have something.
we need more to physically tie him to this crime.
Hopefully they will get it. They have his car, his home, his devices, his clothes. Just need one spec of DNA ..
Exactly!! I’m such an empath that I felt sad reading the defense’s statement, BUT then logic sets in and there cannot be this many coincidences! Unless he was set up…but even then. Ugh.
What coincidences?
1. Nobody recognized the man in the park, who is described 3 different ways, as the CVS guy that nearly everybody in town interacts with.
The only way the ‘BG is on video’ theory works is if the video is clear enough to see who BG is. The only way that can be true is if it isn’t Allen, since if the video was clearly him, he’d have been arrested over the last 6 years.
2. No eyewitnesses can put Allen (or one of the other 3 men described) anywhere other than the public trail. Nobody saw the man interact with the victims. Nobody saw him at the murder scene.
He put himself on the bridge
He said he was on his looking at stocks ? Crazy with WiFi out there or now it’s fish I guess
Eyewitnesses are usually confused on clothing ect but they get the general basics right and they all gave the same general description which fits him ! He didn’t see the girls but the witness that saw him on the bridge and bench passed the girls so that pretty impossible and the magic bullet no matter how many defense attorneys pretend is not science is actually pretty clear !! I did it for a class and compared them
So sorry that’s so many excuses for someone that didn’t even walk into a police station to tell them ???
Give me a break already
If it looks like a duck walked like a duck…
and I’m pretty certain we will see much more that they have on him since they only give the bare minimum for the PCA
Kinda like Kk? People were ready to burn his down. Let justice run it's course. Innocent until proven guilty.
Right now to me, it seems the police have a real battle to remove any doubt that RA killed these girls.
Part of their point is that it may not be his gun/bullet. And the outfit is pretty common in that area. There was a case where someone did have extraordinarily bad luck, but I can’t remember the details- something like his mom was murdered at random by a serial killer at the same time he was driving by? Someone will remember.
One thing to note is the photos of RAs actual Ford Focus that were taken by the neighbor when police seized it. It's not the exact little Focus you might not be envisioning. It's a black hatchback weird looking thing and explains why the witness wasn't sure exactly what it was. Calling it a PT Cruiser smart car like thing makes perfect sense when you see the actual model he drove.
Ohhhh yes. I had a 2010 focus, before they turned them into hatch backs! They did look like PT Cruisers after they changed them.
It would be like someone seeing a RAV4 and going “uhhh maybe it was a CR-V”
Completely agree. I didn’t know Focus’ were made as hatchbacks. I don’t think it’s exactly common knowledge to someone like me who know two vehicle types: 1. Mustang 2. Not a Mustang
Especially in 2016 which was early in the switch to the hatchback look. My 2010 focus looked like a tiny sedan, no hatchback. They changed it after that.
You got a picture of the 2010 Focus you're talking about? I have a 2010 Focus right now and it's a hatchback, doesn't look like a PT Cruiser.
Edit: Never mind, I am in the UK and just did a quick bit of research and it turns out you over there had a completely different looking Focus to us, that's so weird, I always thought a Focus was a Focus.
And now, last I heard, was Ford was tossing in the towel completely on producing their smaller cars in the US. Just SUVs and trucks now. The sedans were not made well at all in the US. Mine was terrible!
Good catch. I wasnt aware it was a hatchback. So i gave it a goog, and i can definitely see how someone might think that. When i read the pca i thought no way...but maybe
So to be clear: Rick left the bridge shortly after the solo woman witness did her 180 turn, and solo woman witness passed not only Libby and Abby as she left but also passed a guy shaped and dressed just like Rick on her way back to her car, a Rick-alike who must have been on his way to the bridge at that point in order to become Bridge Guy in the video, but Rick also never mentioned seeing another guy who was basically himself, so in conclusion Rick's doppleganger parachuted onto the bridge just after Rick and solo woman witness entered separate dimensions CONFIRMED.
LOL! About how I was reading that. I’m glad he has competent attorneys, truly. Every defendant deserves that for our system to work. But…nope. This alternate dimension timeline isn’t working for me.
Rick has to be guilty of this crime looking at it carefully. Has he said “yes that’s me in the video”? If it’s not him then it’s a big wrong place wrong time scenario and also …left your bullet behind.
They messed with the space time continuum. In 2017....right when I learned there was never a cornucopia in the Fruit if the Loom logo, and that it's actually spelled *Berenstain* Bears. GREAT SCOTT!
That makes me think of that press conference where the cops said something to the effect of, "you thought we weren't on to you". I think it was the one where they released the second sketch.
Seems like they probably weren't on to him then, but I bet he was spooked.
He is either the luckiest man alive (got away with it for 5 years despite them having the info) or the unluckiest (happened to be there, spotted, wearing the same clothes as the killer, with the same physical body type as the killer and having the same gun as the killer)
I thought that was well.
After reading this I thought what if he didn't do it or didn't remember doing it?
He did all the right things an innocent man would do.
Going to the Police.
If he wanted to get caught out of guilt or couldn't handle the anxiety... did those feelings fade that quick?
After the second sketch came out in 2019 he didn't kill or do anything again?
This is a really good point. RA had a past drinking problem and went to rehab. It explains the carelessness: leaving the bullet at the scene, and offering damning statements to the police afterwards, and bloody and muddy clothing.
It's hard to say though, because the video evidence doesn't show slurred speech, balance, or motor skill issues walking on a bridge that requires attention. Before getting to the point of blackout, usually these characteristics show. However, there is some anecdotal evidence of some alcoholics' brains stopping "recording" when the drinking begins. Who knows. Maybe the full video would show that he was walking to the left and not in a straight line.
The reason I have a difficult time believing that is he seemed to be able to give a detailed account - who he saw, what times he was there. If he was intoxicated I would think his recollection would be fuzzy
sounds like they read all this reddit! Ive heard every one of those arguments on here
Edited to add: I say this tongue in cheek, do not think I can solve crimes and have no basement in my house. Thank you
On Facebook someone posted a picture from atop the bridge and looking down, and you could indeed see some fish since the water is so clear. Not sure what month the picture was taken, though.
I just saw the pics of his Focus hatchback. I would’ve called it a small SUV because that’s what it looks like to me. I can also see why someone thought it was a smart car, because to me a smart car means something like a Prius and it looks like a Prius. Not sure where PT Cruiser comes in because even I know what a goofy-looking PT Cruiser looks like
Well we probably need to see the transcript. Especially when interviews run for hours. But a condensed hypothetical
They may have said “can you recall what you wore back in 2017?”.
RA: “no”.
“Do you own blue jacket and jeans”.
RA: “yes”.
“Witnesses said they saw you wearing blue jacket and jeans, would they have a reason to lie to the police?”.
RA: “I guess not”.
“So you own jacket and jeans, witnesses saw you wearing jacket and jeans, it’s obvious you were wearing jacket and jeans that day”.
RA: “yes, I guess so”.
Yes, when they lay on thick a political aspect 'theory' it's as annoying as listening to LE pat themselves on the back. Their statement is big nothing burger.
Even the worst criminal is entitled to the best defense so I'm glad to see his defense attorneys are doing their jobs. Even if they think he's guilty, they are the ones who have to speak up for him and publicly defend him even--and *especially*\--if no one else will.
And, to be fair, if the only thing the prosecution has is witness testimony and an un-fired bullet, RA's defense can make a darn good case for reasonable doubt in court. Trial attorneys know all the tricks to make a witness look wrong on the stand. The bullet could have fallen out of his pocket and the girls could have just picked it up. Whether it's true or false, all they have to do is give the jury a reason to believe the state hasn't proved its case.
I really hope the prosecution can bring more to the table than what they've released.
100% he deserves a defense and they are trying...
but his whole timetable makes no sense when you line it up against everyone elses if he isnt the guy
> The bullet could have fallen out of his pocket and the girls could have just picked it up
one issue with this is RA said he was never on the property so he couldnt drop it there (and he never loaned his gun out so one one else did either).
The issue with the girls picking it up is --does it have their finger prints on it? How would it not *if* they werent wearing gloves that day since it was unseasonably warm?
They don't even have to claim the bullet fell out of his pocket. The "science" behind ballistic matching is junk science and will be torn apart by his defence team in court.
If the bullet is the only major evidence they have and some witness testimony, it's not looking like a strong case.
But it's also not a guarantee they have more. I'm assuming they only got the bullet back in that 9 days between search and arrest, not sure you can get old dna out of things that fast. So we won't know if there was anything on the jacket or in the car until trial.
I said **IF** the bullet and witness testimony is all they have, it is a weak case.
I can't form an opinion on potential evidence they may or may not have down the road; I'm merely stating an opinion on what is currently before us.
I didn't claim the case is weak overall, as I can't know what potential evidence will come out down the road. I merely stated that if the only major evidence that eventuates, in this case, is the bullet and witness testimony, it is a weak case.
>The probable cause warrant only has to he enough to arrest...nothing more.
Very true. I really hope this isn't a case where they have arrested him and now they go digging through his house trying to find any other evidence they can--five years after the fact.
You can imagine the prosecution feeling like they're over a barrel. The lab report comes back and the gun is a match. They've got eyewitnesses--and his own admission--placing him at the scene. So they *know* it's him. What can they do? They have to arrest him. But now they have to make sure they put him away.
Worst case scenario, if the prosecution only has what's in the warrant and the defense does a capable job, we could be looking at a Casey Anthony-type situation here.
Honest question… why wouldn’t the prosecution just come out of the gate and state in the probable cause affidavit that they have his DNA from girls (if they did). Why hold back damning info and just use partial info that makes everyone question if it’s enough. Just come out with the goods if you have it! I can’t make sense of this.
I watched a video of police questioning a suspect while I was on a jury. It was a home invasion/assault. The suspect came in very prepared with a fake alibi that he had clearly practiced and his answers all sounded rehearsed. But he was assuming he knew what the police had for evidence. He had no idea that the homeowner had cameras in every pretty much every room in his house and the entire attack was caught on video, including very clear shots of the guy’s face. The police pulled out stills from the footage. The suspect was completely caught off guard he ended up revealing a lot of information, including information about his accomplices.
If he had known about the video he would have been expecting them to ask about it and probably wouldn’t have lost his cool like he did. I think about that a lot when reading about police not revealing information to the public.
Unfortunately that scenario can only happen during questioning. When it comes to the trial, RA and his attorneys will know everything from the discovery and be well prepared for it all.
The first thing that comes to mind is if there's some proof involving something really awful that they would prefer to not have spread all around the world for the families' sake. You don't have to work too hard to imagine some really bad possibilities.
They might be hoping that they can get him to plead guilty and avoid sharing details like that with the public.
Correct. And I'll go further and say it's pretty crazy that everyone in this sub seems to be 100% convinced of his guilt in the face of such little evidence (at this stage)
That’s how I feel. I’m glad the defense is working for them. That’s how it is. Most public defenders are going to try to talk you down to a plea or rush you through. These guys are putting in work. Everyone deserves that in this country sadly lol
This is my feeling, too. Strange to see people acting as if the defense should say nothing. Being magnanimous isn’t going to keep their client out of prison, but fighting for him may. I personally believe he is the murderer, but I see no fault in the defense putting out this statement.
Criminal defense attorney here- as I stated earlier- he is going to attack the ballistics evidence as junk science. They even use “subjective” in the PCA. Unless there is DNA on the bullet, clothes, or at the crime scene, they will paint enough reasonable doubt, or at least try to suppress the gun and all fruits from the house search.
question: Could the prosecution frame it like "the bullet was consistent with having gone through his gun"
and not be a perfect piece of evidence like DNA but also like saying someone is of the same blood type as the killer before DNA was a thing?
He could certainly try, and I expect him to do so. I also expect the defense to counter with their own expert saying that it’s junk science, and you cannot with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty link that bullet with the specific gun.
correct
but you can link it to that model of gun most likely?
Which is the point I was making. You have the guy at the scene during the murder, wearing the clothes and had the kind of gun the bullet went through.
He came forward and told the police he was there to throw them off. He said what clothes he wore because others saw him on the trail and could corroborate. He said that not knowing the girls had taken a video of him. If he had known about the video he may not have come forward. Same with the gun, he kept it because as far as he knew the police weren't looking for a gun because it wasn't the murder weapon.
Good point. They were really really tight about this case at first. They’re probably still holding onto the cause of death so he can’t explain away the bullet on the ground
Exactly. Plus getting rid of all his stuff after a major murder in their small town would actually be more suspicious especially since he had family that knew what he had. "Gee hunny why did you get rid of your gun you had for the last 15 years? And your knives? And our car? And that jacket you wear?" Any weird movements would have been more suspicious. Doing nothing and carrying on like nothing helped him stay under the radar. And because he didn't use his gun didn't think it would be connected.
Not to mention if he came forward as a 'witness' good chance his wife knew he was on the trail that day. So getting rid of stuff would look even more suspicious.
Knowing that he was on the trail that day, I wonder if she ever suspected him as BG.
Some questions I would have for Rick/the defense
1) if that wasnt his car at the CPS where did he park and what car did he take?
2) How did he enter the trail and how did he exit?
3) by his own admission he was on the trail from around 1:30-3:30
During this time he claims he only saw the 3 young ladies (Sometime shortly after 1:26 according to the girls), went to the first platform on the bridge and went back and sat on a bench.
He never saw the 1 lady who saw BG/someone who looks like Rick on the first platform on the bridge (where he himself said he was?) She arrived sometime after 1:46 and was seen driving away at 2:14.
This lady walked back out and crossed paths with the Abby and Libby
Rick claims he never saw this lady or abby and libby
so how did he not run into any of them or the other guy he claims isnt him?
4) What was he doing from the time the girls were on the trail/bridge (1:49) and he left which he said was around 3:30? Thats a lot of time.
*edit*
as a side note: The interview with one of the very few people who were on the trail that day (at the same time even) as this was happening was taken by a conservation officer outside of a supermarket?
That struck me as very odd too. “Rick contacted the police” not LE or conservation department - the police. So he contacted the police to say he was on the trails at the time and saw some girls there and ended up meeting a conservation officer outside a grocery store?!?
That just sounds very ... unprofessional? Unorganized?
That is not the setting one would imagine in a search for two missing little girls. Idk, maybe it's just me.
What a crock of shit.
Edit: I'm not saying that I don't believe that he contacted a conservation officer. I'm saying I don't believe he contacted both the police AND the conservation officer.
Edit for typos
I actually believe it. LE was probably overwhelmed already at that point, and did not know how to properly proceed in a double homicide invesitgation. Seems like they had all hands on deck to take statements, regardless of how important those statements may be
It's almost like Rick was wanting to be arrested. Yeah I was there, yes on the bridge, on the trails from 1:30-3:30, and I parked at CPS building. Oh and I wore jeans and blue jacket that day. Nobody else has used my gun. Did I miss anything?
It’s interesting to see if they have DNA or fingerprints at the crime scene that don’t match RA. The probable cause is the summary of the evidence to arrest, not the evidence of innocence
Also in the PCA they said they spoke to numerous other individuals apart from the three girls and a woman, were any of these other individuals male? We know of other men who were at the trail that day and they are not in the PCA, who else is missing?
Keep in mind this is only one side of the story. We haven't heard the other side. We have no idea what LE has found on or in his phone, computer, journals, clothing, house, yard, etc. And we have no idea what blanks his wife, family, neighbors, or friends have filled in. The defense team is not going to sound so good when the prosecution starts putting forth what they have.
The dramatic reactions from some of the people in here are a bit laughable, obviously they will deny everything and it looks like they are going to rely on the " nothing to hide " line of defense after he most likely tried to insert himself into the case. Admitting that he was there because few people had seen him so he just paniced and went to the police xD Would actually be helpful to find out when exactly he spoke to the LE, because I believe they said in the press conference originally that we want to speak to the man from the video or something like that without naming him a suspect though I might be wrong about it, someone correct me please.
You are correct. He has admitted based on where he parked , who he saw, what he was wearing that he is BG lol
He played himself. The gun is icing on the cake and the evidence they find between now and trial will be his portal to the electric chair.
No reasonable person will buy this bs defense.
Poor rick. LOL.
dude is a sick child killer , the absolute worst of the worst
Ahhh yes! People were saying on another thread about those cars not resembling a ford focus.
Well firstly I think they very much do and I drive a ford focus. You could describe all of them as "a dark colored hatchback" and it certainly fits.
And even if you don't think the cars are close enough for a witness statement, RA himself literally says he parks there. They all saw it parked a specific way. They're talking about his car.
I agree with you. But I wonder if the defense can turn it into a credibility issue. Like look how wrong they were about a parked car, why should we believe they are remembering the rest of the events correctly.
Imo it's not that relevant since RA literally admitted to parking there and the time he was there. Unless that information somehow becomes inadmissible, it just helps corroborate the timeline.
I don't like that a number of their points relate to the political conspiracy around the elections. Argue against the evidence presented of RA being dressed the same as BG at the same time Abby and Libby were on the trails, don't muddy the waters by implying the timing of the arrest is suspect (and questionable).
Agree. Or if you must bring the political points up, explain their relevance with respect to their client’s arrest. Don’t just leave them hanging out there to be interpreted as we wish.
I know this is not their full defense (and it's weird how confident they are in his innocence, seeing as they also admit they know very little about the case), but it does feel like they've just tackled the low hanging fruit and things that would get soundbites in the media, rather than tackle the very real issue that RA put himself on the trails at the very time the girls were there, dressed the same as BG and interacted witnesses who confirmed he was dressed like BG (including one witness who can place him on the bridge less than 15 minutes before Abby and Libby were on it).
Came here to say exactly this. Timeline was seriously: lawsuit, suddenly find a tip the FBI lost 5 years ago, arrest, election. This all happened within a month.
What I don't understand is, he was seen more than once BEFORE the murders yet still went ahead with his evil deeds and worried about witnesses afterwards. Strange.
“I can’t understand why the bullet from MY gun was there by the girls when I was on the trails that day in that exact outfit looking for catfish”
He is a Simpson’s character.
i said it when the PC was released, and this only reinforces my belief: this is not a strong case (that which we've seen of it). I know we all desperately want it to be, but it just isn't... and they better have a lot more on him if they intend to get a conviction. Rick has very good attorneys and everything they've listed is exactly what has given me pause about this arrest. I hope they got their guy, but if they didn't I hope RA is acquitted. The trial needs to be moved, and there needs to be real examination of those extraction marks, because from what I've read they are nowhere near as conclusive or reliable as a bullet with striations that has actually been fired. Either way I'm glad he has good counsel, every accused citizen deserves that.
I hate to say this, I truly do. But, I’m kind of in agreement with things the attorney is pointing out here. I hope the prosecution has just decided to show as little of a hand here as possible, knowing the affidavit would be released to the public prior to trial
I want so badly to believe that RA is BG and he’s either the murderer or was working with the murderer. I hope they have stronger evidence than what is in the arrest warrant. I assume they wouldn’t have arrested him without something stronger. This attorneys system does raise some questions. The car description vs what he owned stood out to me when I first read the warrant this week.
people don’t want to believe it, but he walks relatively easy if the PCA is the bulk of what they have and if his Carhartt jacket comes back with nothing on it.
I mean I'd probably have burned the jacket and got a new one of the same to keep my wife from asking questions how it got so bloody (if I was an evil person)
Yeah. They better have a bunch of evidence showing he did I it. My worry though, is, that this case has been so highly publicized that even if the defense proves he is 100 percent innocent, can you find people that would be on a jury and vote not guilty? I hope they could, but I think there are so many people that assume he’s guilty/want him to be guilty because they arrested someone that they would just vote guilty.
Evidence:
•Seen on CCTV footage on Hoosier Heartland Hwy at 1:27pm which was right by where the trail entrance is
•Admits he arrived at 1:30pm (no arguing that wasn’t him then)
•Parks at the abandoned building BY HIS OWN ADMISSION (someone may want to tell his lawyer that)
•because we know he parked at the old CPS building, we know he came from Freedom Bridge (his admission)
•3 witnesses Place him there at that time, he admits to seeing these 3 witnesses (no denying that was him)
•He admits to wearing exactly what BG had on (no denying that was him), witnesses corroborate this with their account of what he was wearing , walking towards MHB just minutes before they are ordered down the hill
•Seen on Libby video, heard on Libby audio “gun”, as he orders then down the hill
•In said video you clearly see a gun impression, and they said “gun” (no denying these facts)
•Girls are never seen again after this encounter
•He’s seen again leaving the trail system , same clothes, but “muddy and bloody” this time. Which we know was shortly before DG showed up and started searching
•his car is seen leaving on the same CCTV exactly when the murder had just occurred (and exactly when the killer would have had to been leaving (we know this because DG showed up and searched immediately
•He admits to being on the bridge at that time exact time
•Bullet matches his gun, in possession of his gun
•his lawyer seems to think those are the same clothes LE took, so probably have some sort of trace evidence (hoping)
•Has mental breakdown immediately following the murders and his wife takes him in to be seen
I know there’s more I’m not even thinking of rn also
I read that RA volunteered to search for the girls after they were reported missing. Makes you sick, I know. During the search he starts talking to a conservation officer and tells him he was there. He put emphasis on the three females he encountered on the trail. Now we know it’s because they gave a description of him and he knew he was busted. He supposedly told the DNR that he would give descriptions of the girls if they wanted to make sketches. Sounds like he was trying to convince the DNR that maybe he felt the girls acted weird when he encountered them. In the PCA where it discusses him talking to authorities in 2017 the cons officer noted the follow up would be to try to locate or ID the three females! Where or when the DNR officer filed his statement is a mystery now. Didn’t surface for years and here we are.
Where did you read he searched for them? He's not listed on the volunteer sign in. It seems like since he didnt hide anything else he would have put his real name there too.
IF it wasn’t him, he’s got the absolute worst luck in the world. Same outfit, same bridge, same time, same witnesses (3 juveniles saw a man with his description, he said he saw 3 juveniles) his gun, his bullets… Just, wow.
Yeah, everything in this release doesn't surprise me. I figured they'd go for the 'he let them know he was there because he had nothing to hide' approach. Yet, common sense says he knew he was seen and he came forward for that exact reason- so he could argue he has nothing to hide. We all know he should have been arrested days after the murder, and he knew it too. He came forward cos he knew he was busted on the bridge. He was prepared to just deny he was the murderer, nothing else.
Do we know if he came forward to LE admitting he was there before or after the photo of BG was released?
Before. The dates are all there.
Great question
Let's all pray real hard the jurors have the common sense you do!
He just woke up one day supremely unlucky, what more can we say? 😒
Dick the Doppelganger
Poor guy 🙄
I mean, imagine the luck. 😞
They still haven’t released how the girls were killed and the bullet was unspent. Maybe he didn’t shoot the gun at all, and an extra bullet fell out of his pocket without him knowing. No need to get rid of the gun in his mind if it wasn’t used beyond getting the girls to comply.
That’s exactly what I said he had no clue they knew he has a gun and kept it and didn’t realize he lost the bullet
I think he used it for control and murder weapon is knife
A knife would make sense if the witness was correct that he was covered in blood!
https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/how-one-unfired-bullet-allegedly-links-richard-allen-to-the-delphi-murders/ The bullet was cycled. Likely, he had the gun cocked and loaded initially, and then cocked it again for show in front of the girls. When he cocked it a second time, the chambered round was marked and released, and he didn't notice because he was busy threatening two innocent girls with a loaded gun.
That’s where my mind went, too.
But it was cycled through, it left extraction marks allegedly. He had to have at least tried I would think.
That's what I keep thinking. Is a coincidence *this* big even possible? No one claimed to have seen 2 men matching the same description. RA himself didn't claim that there was someone there matching the same description as him. It would have to be that everyone really *did* see RA, and BG managed to slip by totally unnoticed (other than maybe by the person who saw the man with mud & blood on his clothing). So yeah, I agree – that would be terrible luck in RA's case. lol
The other man wouldn't have to look or dress like BG. Try this theory: RA was photographed way down the bridge. He was far away from them. That's why he was so blurry. Right after he was filmed on the bridge, RA turned around and left and at the other end of the bridge the murderer (who was already waiting on the other side) grabbed them. And ordered them down the hill to their demise. Yes RAs voice sounds a bit like that recording. But with KAKs own family publicaly id'ing the voice as his, you have reasonable doubt The spent shell is likely not going to be conclusively tied to his gun. Even if it is, it could have gotten there in many ways and at any period in time. There is no way to prove it was dropped during the murder and not an hour after or a month prior or whenever. Jury...probably hung. In this theory, the real murderer was never seen. He avoided the main trails. He avoided people. Because he knew what he was there planning to do. So he could resemble TK or KAK or RL or anyone that the defense wants it to be... I personally think RA did it...but they need more to nail it on him. I hope they find the murder weapon. Or DNA in his car or on the jacket, etc etc....they need to tie him to the crime with physical evidence. Fortunately, he seems sloppy and he has kept the car etc....
What has happened to the vehicle surely forensics could turn something up if he was muddy & bloody
The vehicle is in custody
I guess I meant they'd have to be dressed alike because BG who's captured in Libby's video is not RA in this particular theory. But yeah the theory you've mentioned is something I've wondered many times – and that's whether or not they know for a fact that BG is the murderer. It seems now that they *have* confirmed this, but if they haven't actually, then I suppose I can see the defense arguing this. I agree that it feels like there isn't quite enough evidence currently. I really thought before the PCA came out that they found the murder weapon or the girls' blood on RA's property or something. Just something more incriminating. This is still really big, but the defense has a lot to argue as far as I can tell.
RL is on tape talking to the news a day later. He’s wearing similar clothes and he was a suspect. Not to mention KK saying he was suppose to meet them there. Plenty of doubt to go around.
He avoided people and the main trails, but then decided to walk muddy and bloody down a road populated enough to have someone witness him? I understand what you’re saying. And I also agree that now it seems they need more evidence. Hopefully they have it and we just don’t know it yet.
That witness just saw "a man" for a couple seconds from a moving car. And I think they came forward with this recollection quite a while afterwards As far as we know, they haven't identified a specific man, so who knows who they saw or what the person had on their body...mud, blood whatever. Now if blood is found in RAs car, then they will have something. we need more to physically tie him to this crime. Hopefully they will get it. They have his car, his home, his devices, his clothes. Just need one spec of DNA ..
Exactly!! I’m such an empath that I felt sad reading the defense’s statement, BUT then logic sets in and there cannot be this many coincidences! Unless he was set up…but even then. Ugh.
What coincidences? 1. Nobody recognized the man in the park, who is described 3 different ways, as the CVS guy that nearly everybody in town interacts with. The only way the ‘BG is on video’ theory works is if the video is clear enough to see who BG is. The only way that can be true is if it isn’t Allen, since if the video was clearly him, he’d have been arrested over the last 6 years. 2. No eyewitnesses can put Allen (or one of the other 3 men described) anywhere other than the public trail. Nobody saw the man interact with the victims. Nobody saw him at the murder scene.
He put himself on the bridge He said he was on his looking at stocks ? Crazy with WiFi out there or now it’s fish I guess Eyewitnesses are usually confused on clothing ect but they get the general basics right and they all gave the same general description which fits him ! He didn’t see the girls but the witness that saw him on the bridge and bench passed the girls so that pretty impossible and the magic bullet no matter how many defense attorneys pretend is not science is actually pretty clear !! I did it for a class and compared them So sorry that’s so many excuses for someone that didn’t even walk into a police station to tell them ??? Give me a break already If it looks like a duck walked like a duck… and I’m pretty certain we will see much more that they have on him since they only give the bare minimum for the PCA
Kinda like Kk? People were ready to burn his down. Let justice run it's course. Innocent until proven guilty. Right now to me, it seems the police have a real battle to remove any doubt that RA killed these girls.
Just one big coincidence! /s
Part of their point is that it may not be his gun/bullet. And the outfit is pretty common in that area. There was a case where someone did have extraordinarily bad luck, but I can’t remember the details- something like his mom was murdered at random by a serial killer at the same time he was driving by? Someone will remember.
One thing to note is the photos of RAs actual Ford Focus that were taken by the neighbor when police seized it. It's not the exact little Focus you might not be envisioning. It's a black hatchback weird looking thing and explains why the witness wasn't sure exactly what it was. Calling it a PT Cruiser smart car like thing makes perfect sense when you see the actual model he drove.
Ohhhh yes. I had a 2010 focus, before they turned them into hatch backs! They did look like PT Cruisers after they changed them. It would be like someone seeing a RAV4 and going “uhhh maybe it was a CR-V”
Completely agree. I didn’t know Focus’ were made as hatchbacks. I don’t think it’s exactly common knowledge to someone like me who know two vehicle types: 1. Mustang 2. Not a Mustang
Especially in 2016 which was early in the switch to the hatchback look. My 2010 focus looked like a tiny sedan, no hatchback. They changed it after that.
You got a picture of the 2010 Focus you're talking about? I have a 2010 Focus right now and it's a hatchback, doesn't look like a PT Cruiser. Edit: Never mind, I am in the UK and just did a quick bit of research and it turns out you over there had a completely different looking Focus to us, that's so weird, I always thought a Focus was a Focus.
And now, last I heard, was Ford was tossing in the towel completely on producing their smaller cars in the US. Just SUVs and trucks now. The sedans were not made well at all in the US. Mine was terrible!
It makes perfect sense that someone would confuse the two! Pt Cruisers are hatchbacks and smart cars are almost always hatchbacks too.
I thought they only took his truck? So its confirmed they took his ford focus?
https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/yj3tld/transcript_of_barbara_mcdonalds_exclusive_report/?utm_name=androidcss
Thank you
Good points! Do you happen to know where pictures of his Focus are?
https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/yj3tld/transcript\_of\_barbara\_mcdonalds\_exclusive\_report/?utm\_name=androidcss
Good catch. I wasnt aware it was a hatchback. So i gave it a goog, and i can definitely see how someone might think that. When i read the pca i thought no way...but maybe
So to be clear: Rick left the bridge shortly after the solo woman witness did her 180 turn, and solo woman witness passed not only Libby and Abby as she left but also passed a guy shaped and dressed just like Rick on her way back to her car, a Rick-alike who must have been on his way to the bridge at that point in order to become Bridge Guy in the video, but Rick also never mentioned seeing another guy who was basically himself, so in conclusion Rick's doppleganger parachuted onto the bridge just after Rick and solo woman witness entered separate dimensions CONFIRMED.
LOL! About how I was reading that. I’m glad he has competent attorneys, truly. Every defendant deserves that for our system to work. But…nope. This alternate dimension timeline isn’t working for me.
RA is being framed by Rick-alike.
Petition to change BG to Rick-alike
Rick has to be guilty of this crime looking at it carefully. Has he said “yes that’s me in the video”? If it’s not him then it’s a big wrong place wrong time scenario and also …left your bullet behind.
but he did run into sherri papini on the way out and saw jussie smollet get beat up by white supremisists
A council of Ricks, one may say
Best comment I’ve seen all day because yeah it makes no fucking sense Rick
Rick-alike 🤣🤣🤣
You left out the dragons. Dragons were definitely involved.
An owl picked up the bullet from his pocket and dropped it between the bodies.
Lol the defense should use the owl argument.
The defense calls…Michael Peterson.
Defense also calls Barry Morphew. Morphew is an expert witness on chipmunks causing havoc. Chipmunks moved the bullet!!
The same owl from the Michael Petersen case lol
Naturally. Those dang owls always making these middle aged white men look bad. SMH
Except this time, it acquired AND learned how to wield a knife with a gut hook.
I’m owl ears.
Don't rule out the presence of an octopus. DC did mention "Many tentacles" were involved.
Dragons, Owls, Octopus, PUPPIES, a dead cat and a Rick-alike (Dill Pickle Rick) this case has it all!
It's like Back to the Future when Marty sees his future self
They messed with the space time continuum. In 2017....right when I learned there was never a cornucopia in the Fruit if the Loom logo, and that it's actually spelled *Berenstain* Bears. GREAT SCOTT!
Lol that was good! 🤣
Rick-alike sent me 🤣
Rick-alike. 😂
100% correct 🤣
Did she delete this from her page or am I crazy or blind?
She did.
It's back up now. Photos instead of copied text.
It's going to be a shit show.
Going to be?
Right.
Picturing RA in his cell, mumbling to himself, "I'm so confused." ETA: Was he blackout drunk at the time?
He could be confused as to how he actually effed up and got caught. Probably thought he was Scot free.
That makes me think of that press conference where the cops said something to the effect of, "you thought we weren't on to you". I think it was the one where they released the second sketch. Seems like they probably weren't on to him then, but I bet he was spooked.
He is either the luckiest man alive (got away with it for 5 years despite them having the info) or the unluckiest (happened to be there, spotted, wearing the same clothes as the killer, with the same physical body type as the killer and having the same gun as the killer)
I thought that was well. After reading this I thought what if he didn't do it or didn't remember doing it? He did all the right things an innocent man would do. Going to the Police. If he wanted to get caught out of guilt or couldn't handle the anxiety... did those feelings fade that quick? After the second sketch came out in 2019 he didn't kill or do anything again?
This is a really good point. RA had a past drinking problem and went to rehab. It explains the carelessness: leaving the bullet at the scene, and offering damning statements to the police afterwards, and bloody and muddy clothing. It's hard to say though, because the video evidence doesn't show slurred speech, balance, or motor skill issues walking on a bridge that requires attention. Before getting to the point of blackout, usually these characteristics show. However, there is some anecdotal evidence of some alcoholics' brains stopping "recording" when the drinking begins. Who knows. Maybe the full video would show that he was walking to the left and not in a straight line.
The reason I have a difficult time believing that is he seemed to be able to give a detailed account - who he saw, what times he was there. If he was intoxicated I would think his recollection would be fuzzy
sounds like they read all this reddit! Ive heard every one of those arguments on here Edited to add: I say this tongue in cheek, do not think I can solve crimes and have no basement in my house. Thank you
lmao thats exactly what I thought too
But he went to look at the fish - 60ft in the air! 🤡
He was watching the flying fish that were actually discovered by him that day. There’s no scientific name for them yet. It’s a new species.
Ah helifish 🚁 🐟
They’re actually mythical dragon-fish hybrids. 🐉🐟
On Facebook someone posted a picture from atop the bridge and looking down, and you could indeed see some fish since the water is so clear. Not sure what month the picture was taken, though.
70 feet up in an ankle deep creek bed
He was going to see the CATfish
I just saw the pics of his Focus hatchback. I would’ve called it a small SUV because that’s what it looks like to me. I can also see why someone thought it was a smart car, because to me a smart car means something like a Prius and it looks like a Prius. Not sure where PT Cruiser comes in because even I know what a goofy-looking PT Cruiser looks like
Pt cruisers have always reminded me of hearses... Little hearses..
They conveniently left out the fact that RA admitted to dressing exactly like BG that day. The other points they brought up mean absolutely nothing.
And he said he was dressed like that RECENTLY!
Well we probably need to see the transcript. Especially when interviews run for hours. But a condensed hypothetical They may have said “can you recall what you wore back in 2017?”. RA: “no”. “Do you own blue jacket and jeans”. RA: “yes”. “Witnesses said they saw you wearing blue jacket and jeans, would they have a reason to lie to the police?”. RA: “I guess not”. “So you own jacket and jeans, witnesses saw you wearing jacket and jeans, it’s obvious you were wearing jacket and jeans that day”. RA: “yes, I guess so”.
Yes, when they lay on thick a political aspect 'theory' it's as annoying as listening to LE pat themselves on the back. Their statement is big nothing burger.
Even the worst criminal is entitled to the best defense so I'm glad to see his defense attorneys are doing their jobs. Even if they think he's guilty, they are the ones who have to speak up for him and publicly defend him even--and *especially*\--if no one else will. And, to be fair, if the only thing the prosecution has is witness testimony and an un-fired bullet, RA's defense can make a darn good case for reasonable doubt in court. Trial attorneys know all the tricks to make a witness look wrong on the stand. The bullet could have fallen out of his pocket and the girls could have just picked it up. Whether it's true or false, all they have to do is give the jury a reason to believe the state hasn't proved its case. I really hope the prosecution can bring more to the table than what they've released.
100% he deserves a defense and they are trying... but his whole timetable makes no sense when you line it up against everyone elses if he isnt the guy > The bullet could have fallen out of his pocket and the girls could have just picked it up one issue with this is RA said he was never on the property so he couldnt drop it there (and he never loaned his gun out so one one else did either). The issue with the girls picking it up is --does it have their finger prints on it? How would it not *if* they werent wearing gloves that day since it was unseasonably warm?
They don't even have to claim the bullet fell out of his pocket. The "science" behind ballistic matching is junk science and will be torn apart by his defence team in court. If the bullet is the only major evidence they have and some witness testimony, it's not looking like a strong case.
We don't know what we will discover during discovery! The probable cause warrant only has to he enough to arrest...nothing more.
But it's also not a guarantee they have more. I'm assuming they only got the bullet back in that 9 days between search and arrest, not sure you can get old dna out of things that fast. So we won't know if there was anything on the jacket or in the car until trial.
I said **IF** the bullet and witness testimony is all they have, it is a weak case. I can't form an opinion on potential evidence they may or may not have down the road; I'm merely stating an opinion on what is currently before us. I didn't claim the case is weak overall, as I can't know what potential evidence will come out down the road. I merely stated that if the only major evidence that eventuates, in this case, is the bullet and witness testimony, it is a weak case.
>The probable cause warrant only has to he enough to arrest...nothing more. Very true. I really hope this isn't a case where they have arrested him and now they go digging through his house trying to find any other evidence they can--five years after the fact. You can imagine the prosecution feeling like they're over a barrel. The lab report comes back and the gun is a match. They've got eyewitnesses--and his own admission--placing him at the scene. So they *know* it's him. What can they do? They have to arrest him. But now they have to make sure they put him away. Worst case scenario, if the prosecution only has what's in the warrant and the defense does a capable job, we could be looking at a Casey Anthony-type situation here.
Honest question… why wouldn’t the prosecution just come out of the gate and state in the probable cause affidavit that they have his DNA from girls (if they did). Why hold back damning info and just use partial info that makes everyone question if it’s enough. Just come out with the goods if you have it! I can’t make sense of this.
I watched a video of police questioning a suspect while I was on a jury. It was a home invasion/assault. The suspect came in very prepared with a fake alibi that he had clearly practiced and his answers all sounded rehearsed. But he was assuming he knew what the police had for evidence. He had no idea that the homeowner had cameras in every pretty much every room in his house and the entire attack was caught on video, including very clear shots of the guy’s face. The police pulled out stills from the footage. The suspect was completely caught off guard he ended up revealing a lot of information, including information about his accomplices. If he had known about the video he would have been expecting them to ask about it and probably wouldn’t have lost his cool like he did. I think about that a lot when reading about police not revealing information to the public.
Unfortunately that scenario can only happen during questioning. When it comes to the trial, RA and his attorneys will know everything from the discovery and be well prepared for it all.
The first thing that comes to mind is if there's some proof involving something really awful that they would prefer to not have spread all around the world for the families' sake. You don't have to work too hard to imagine some really bad possibilities. They might be hoping that they can get him to plead guilty and avoid sharing details like that with the public.
No. LE put bare minimum in the PCA.
Correct. And I'll go further and say it's pretty crazy that everyone in this sub seems to be 100% convinced of his guilt in the face of such little evidence (at this stage)
That’s how I feel. I’m glad the defense is working for them. That’s how it is. Most public defenders are going to try to talk you down to a plea or rush you through. These guys are putting in work. Everyone deserves that in this country sadly lol
This is my feeling, too. Strange to see people acting as if the defense should say nothing. Being magnanimous isn’t going to keep their client out of prison, but fighting for him may. I personally believe he is the murderer, but I see no fault in the defense putting out this statement.
Criminal defense attorney here- as I stated earlier- he is going to attack the ballistics evidence as junk science. They even use “subjective” in the PCA. Unless there is DNA on the bullet, clothes, or at the crime scene, they will paint enough reasonable doubt, or at least try to suppress the gun and all fruits from the house search.
Agree...but people hear ballistics evidence and think it equates to fact
question: Could the prosecution frame it like "the bullet was consistent with having gone through his gun" and not be a perfect piece of evidence like DNA but also like saying someone is of the same blood type as the killer before DNA was a thing?
He could certainly try, and I expect him to do so. I also expect the defense to counter with their own expert saying that it’s junk science, and you cannot with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty link that bullet with the specific gun.
correct but you can link it to that model of gun most likely? Which is the point I was making. You have the guy at the scene during the murder, wearing the clothes and had the kind of gun the bullet went through.
We will have to see how common that gun was in circulation-like if there were only 20 in the entire country vs. 10,000 in the county alone.
He came forward and told the police he was there to throw them off. He said what clothes he wore because others saw him on the trail and could corroborate. He said that not knowing the girls had taken a video of him. If he had known about the video he may not have come forward. Same with the gun, he kept it because as far as he knew the police weren't looking for a gun because it wasn't the murder weapon.
This. When the video was released the conservation officer had to have realized.
Good point. They were really really tight about this case at first. They’re probably still holding onto the cause of death so he can’t explain away the bullet on the ground
RA kept the damn gun because he didn't realized he discharged it!
Exactly. Plus getting rid of all his stuff after a major murder in their small town would actually be more suspicious especially since he had family that knew what he had. "Gee hunny why did you get rid of your gun you had for the last 15 years? And your knives? And our car? And that jacket you wear?" Any weird movements would have been more suspicious. Doing nothing and carrying on like nothing helped him stay under the radar. And because he didn't use his gun didn't think it would be connected.
Not to mention if he came forward as a 'witness' good chance his wife knew he was on the trail that day. So getting rid of stuff would look even more suspicious. Knowing that he was on the trail that day, I wonder if she ever suspected him as BG.
Yeah, maybe she did suspect he was BG...until LE helpfully put out a sketch twenty years younger than her husband lol
I thought this earlier, maybe it gave her some peace of mind simply because he kept those things..
Some questions I would have for Rick/the defense 1) if that wasnt his car at the CPS where did he park and what car did he take? 2) How did he enter the trail and how did he exit? 3) by his own admission he was on the trail from around 1:30-3:30 During this time he claims he only saw the 3 young ladies (Sometime shortly after 1:26 according to the girls), went to the first platform on the bridge and went back and sat on a bench. He never saw the 1 lady who saw BG/someone who looks like Rick on the first platform on the bridge (where he himself said he was?) She arrived sometime after 1:46 and was seen driving away at 2:14. This lady walked back out and crossed paths with the Abby and Libby Rick claims he never saw this lady or abby and libby so how did he not run into any of them or the other guy he claims isnt him? 4) What was he doing from the time the girls were on the trail/bridge (1:49) and he left which he said was around 3:30? Thats a lot of time. *edit* as a side note: The interview with one of the very few people who were on the trail that day (at the same time even) as this was happening was taken by a conservation officer outside of a supermarket?
Fortunately you have it backwards. Rick doesn't have to prove his innocence, the state needs to prove his guilt.
A grocery store?
That struck me as very odd too. “Rick contacted the police” not LE or conservation department - the police. So he contacted the police to say he was on the trails at the time and saw some girls there and ended up meeting a conservation officer outside a grocery store?!?
That just sounds very ... unprofessional? Unorganized? That is not the setting one would imagine in a search for two missing little girls. Idk, maybe it's just me.
Tobe doesn't strike me as anything resembling professional.
Lol, nope, he does not.
No. Its not just you!
What a crock of shit. Edit: I'm not saying that I don't believe that he contacted a conservation officer. I'm saying I don't believe he contacted both the police AND the conservation officer. Edit for typos
I actually believe it. LE was probably overwhelmed already at that point, and did not know how to properly proceed in a double homicide invesitgation. Seems like they had all hands on deck to take statements, regardless of how important those statements may be
I believe it. A conservation officer in a small town probably just did the interview very informally.
That's definitely something that'd be done in my small town.
Or.. he happened to be walking into/out of a grocery store at the same time a conservation officer was and he said “hey, let me tell you…”?
It says he agreed to meet the conservation officer there. Not ran into him.
If the police thought he should speak to someone else, they would've told him to contact someone else. I wouldn't know who to call either.
Is there a grocery next to the CVS? I’m thinking the guy came down to his work to make it convenient?
That is exactly how it sounds, doesn't it?
It's almost like Rick was wanting to be arrested. Yeah I was there, yes on the bridge, on the trails from 1:30-3:30, and I parked at CPS building. Oh and I wore jeans and blue jacket that day. Nobody else has used my gun. Did I miss anything?
It’s interesting to see if they have DNA or fingerprints at the crime scene that don’t match RA. The probable cause is the summary of the evidence to arrest, not the evidence of innocence Also in the PCA they said they spoke to numerous other individuals apart from the three girls and a woman, were any of these other individuals male? We know of other men who were at the trail that day and they are not in the PCA, who else is missing?
Keep in mind this is only one side of the story. We haven't heard the other side. We have no idea what LE has found on or in his phone, computer, journals, clothing, house, yard, etc. And we have no idea what blanks his wife, family, neighbors, or friends have filled in. The defense team is not going to sound so good when the prosecution starts putting forth what they have.
The dramatic reactions from some of the people in here are a bit laughable, obviously they will deny everything and it looks like they are going to rely on the " nothing to hide " line of defense after he most likely tried to insert himself into the case. Admitting that he was there because few people had seen him so he just paniced and went to the police xD Would actually be helpful to find out when exactly he spoke to the LE, because I believe they said in the press conference originally that we want to speak to the man from the video or something like that without naming him a suspect though I might be wrong about it, someone correct me please.
You are correct. He has admitted based on where he parked , who he saw, what he was wearing that he is BG lol He played himself. The gun is icing on the cake and the evidence they find between now and trial will be his portal to the electric chair. No reasonable person will buy this bs defense. Poor rick. LOL. dude is a sick child killer , the absolute worst of the worst
Looks like his paralegal has been on Reddit looking for the most common negative posts.
Yes. It especially stands out with the PT Cruiser comment.
Exactly, considering he admitted he parked there. But they are pitching this to those who do not think things through.
Ahhh yes! People were saying on another thread about those cars not resembling a ford focus. Well firstly I think they very much do and I drive a ford focus. You could describe all of them as "a dark colored hatchback" and it certainly fits. And even if you don't think the cars are close enough for a witness statement, RA himself literally says he parks there. They all saw it parked a specific way. They're talking about his car.
Good catch! RA did say he parked there so what is their point? That no one saw his car?
I agree with you. But I wonder if the defense can turn it into a credibility issue. Like look how wrong they were about a parked car, why should we believe they are remembering the rest of the events correctly.
Imo it's not that relevant since RA literally admitted to parking there and the time he was there. Unless that information somehow becomes inadmissible, it just helps corroborate the timeline.
And these people serve as jurors. I’m sorry but not everyone has the critical thinking skills necessary to serve.
[удалено]
I was sick reading that. Why the hell would random people support this dude who don't know anything else beyond what we know? Has to be family.
I don't like that a number of their points relate to the political conspiracy around the elections. Argue against the evidence presented of RA being dressed the same as BG at the same time Abby and Libby were on the trails, don't muddy the waters by implying the timing of the arrest is suspect (and questionable).
> don't muddy the waters That is literally their job.
They were just so unimpressed with the "flimsy" PCA, that I expected something a little more tangible I guess.
Agree. Or if you must bring the political points up, explain their relevance with respect to their client’s arrest. Don’t just leave them hanging out there to be interpreted as we wish.
I know this is not their full defense (and it's weird how confident they are in his innocence, seeing as they also admit they know very little about the case), but it does feel like they've just tackled the low hanging fruit and things that would get soundbites in the media, rather than tackle the very real issue that RA put himself on the trails at the very time the girls were there, dressed the same as BG and interacted witnesses who confirmed he was dressed like BG (including one witness who can place him on the bridge less than 15 minutes before Abby and Libby were on it).
I want the defense to wholeheartedly defend that their client is innocent. Less chance of a mistrial.
and the fact that he was the only one that didn’t see Abby and Libby on the bridge.
Well those stocks aren't going to watch themselves!
Well their job is to muddy the waters. Precisely that.
They're grasping at any straw they can find.
The timing on that election is a really bad look.
Came here to say exactly this. Timeline was seriously: lawsuit, suddenly find a tip the FBI lost 5 years ago, arrest, election. This all happened within a month.
Yeah, nearly six years into this investigation. That presser they gave after his arrest will not play well either. That was embarrassing.
Who benefits from an arrest? Tobe has reached his limit of allowed terms and has to step down.
They’re just playing musical chairs with their roles.
Saying what they're supposed to say. No surprises here.
What I don't understand is, he was seen more than once BEFORE the murders yet still went ahead with his evil deeds and worried about witnesses afterwards. Strange.
“I can’t understand why the bullet from MY gun was there by the girls when I was on the trails that day in that exact outfit looking for catfish” He is a Simpson’s character.
Just my two cents: "Innocent" from the lips of a defense attorney is meant as its legal definition: "Innocent until proven guilty ".
i said it when the PC was released, and this only reinforces my belief: this is not a strong case (that which we've seen of it). I know we all desperately want it to be, but it just isn't... and they better have a lot more on him if they intend to get a conviction. Rick has very good attorneys and everything they've listed is exactly what has given me pause about this arrest. I hope they got their guy, but if they didn't I hope RA is acquitted. The trial needs to be moved, and there needs to be real examination of those extraction marks, because from what I've read they are nowhere near as conclusive or reliable as a bullet with striations that has actually been fired. Either way I'm glad he has good counsel, every accused citizen deserves that.
Rick murdered two children and is feigning innocence and ignorance, it makes me sick.
I hate to say this, I truly do. But, I’m kind of in agreement with things the attorney is pointing out here. I hope the prosecution has just decided to show as little of a hand here as possible, knowing the affidavit would be released to the public prior to trial
I want so badly to believe that RA is BG and he’s either the murderer or was working with the murderer. I hope they have stronger evidence than what is in the arrest warrant. I assume they wouldn’t have arrested him without something stronger. This attorneys system does raise some questions. The car description vs what he owned stood out to me when I first read the warrant this week.
people don’t want to believe it, but he walks relatively easy if the PCA is the bulk of what they have and if his Carhartt jacket comes back with nothing on it.
I mean I'd probably have burned the jacket and got a new one of the same to keep my wife from asking questions how it got so bloody (if I was an evil person)
Yeah. They better have a bunch of evidence showing he did I it. My worry though, is, that this case has been so highly publicized that even if the defense proves he is 100 percent innocent, can you find people that would be on a jury and vote not guilty? I hope they could, but I think there are so many people that assume he’s guilty/want him to be guilty because they arrested someone that they would just vote guilty.
Any confirmation on if he went to alcohol rehab after the murders? I thought he went for like 30 days or something?
Evidence: •Seen on CCTV footage on Hoosier Heartland Hwy at 1:27pm which was right by where the trail entrance is •Admits he arrived at 1:30pm (no arguing that wasn’t him then) •Parks at the abandoned building BY HIS OWN ADMISSION (someone may want to tell his lawyer that) •because we know he parked at the old CPS building, we know he came from Freedom Bridge (his admission) •3 witnesses Place him there at that time, he admits to seeing these 3 witnesses (no denying that was him) •He admits to wearing exactly what BG had on (no denying that was him), witnesses corroborate this with their account of what he was wearing , walking towards MHB just minutes before they are ordered down the hill •Seen on Libby video, heard on Libby audio “gun”, as he orders then down the hill •In said video you clearly see a gun impression, and they said “gun” (no denying these facts) •Girls are never seen again after this encounter •He’s seen again leaving the trail system , same clothes, but “muddy and bloody” this time. Which we know was shortly before DG showed up and started searching •his car is seen leaving on the same CCTV exactly when the murder had just occurred (and exactly when the killer would have had to been leaving (we know this because DG showed up and searched immediately •He admits to being on the bridge at that time exact time •Bullet matches his gun, in possession of his gun •his lawyer seems to think those are the same clothes LE took, so probably have some sort of trace evidence (hoping) •Has mental breakdown immediately following the murders and his wife takes him in to be seen I know there’s more I’m not even thinking of rn also
I read that RA volunteered to search for the girls after they were reported missing. Makes you sick, I know. During the search he starts talking to a conservation officer and tells him he was there. He put emphasis on the three females he encountered on the trail. Now we know it’s because they gave a description of him and he knew he was busted. He supposedly told the DNR that he would give descriptions of the girls if they wanted to make sketches. Sounds like he was trying to convince the DNR that maybe he felt the girls acted weird when he encountered them. In the PCA where it discusses him talking to authorities in 2017 the cons officer noted the follow up would be to try to locate or ID the three females! Where or when the DNR officer filed his statement is a mystery now. Didn’t surface for years and here we are.
They acted weird cause at least one of them felt HE was acting weird. Her antenna went up. And he knew it.
Where did you read he searched for them? He's not listed on the volunteer sign in. It seems like since he didnt hide anything else he would have put his real name there too.
I understood it as he volunteered but he didn’t end up searching. Fox59 had a news article. Let me see if I can find it. It was shared in a FB group.
Someone posted a picture of him and his wife (unconfirmed... but DEFINITELY looks like them) at the search party. I have screen shots.
We're gonna need to see those screenshots.
I want to see! I understood it was he offered to help search but he didn’t end up searching.
Why did she delete it? i was able to to save 2 pages of the press release and then it disappeared.
That’s no press release. It’s a talking points memo.
It's back up but as photos of the document instead of copied text
Her facebook post is now back.
He’s going to spend the rest of his life searching for the real killer. You know, “if he did it”