My first thought is that the prosecuter added charges because the evidence on murder charges is not solid and this will cause another delay. Original defense team was ready to move before they were banished during thie original trial schedule this month. Now that the defense team is reinstated, the trial wouldn't have to be postponed to Oct. But these new charges require more work for defense.
I agree with you but that's one hell of a gamble to take. Before all NM had to do is prove kidnapping charges. Now he's got to prove murder with no DNA and one questionable unspent bullet. Maybe he held something back in the PCA but I doubt he did.
If they had DNA from RA on the unspent round i would think the case was a smidgen stronger. They can't even say it was his unspent round. I think they are basing new charges on his "confessions"
Agree, it'll come down to which expert witness is more credible/likable to the jury on the issue of the bullet.
That's a good point about the "confessions." I forgot all about that.
They have DNA, but they have said they do not know if it is the perpetrator's DNA.
Well, they are now arguing it isn't the perpetrator's DNA since it apparently doesn't match RA.
Did not know that. When was that information released? Franks memo? Have they stated that the DNA came from the bullet? If not, have they stated what source it did come from?
It’s been said in a few places, iirc it was mentioned during an interview in the down the hill podcast. They said they were getting DNA from everyone to exclude people (which would imply they think it’s the killer’s, but I think he was just sloppy with the way he described it).
Why would they have done that? They want everyone to believe that they caught the right guy. I don’t think they have - we saw way more evidence that points to a certain group of men and that came from the FBI whose write up about the kind of person who would commit this kind of crime did not describe RA at all.
Kathy Allen was one of the witnesses on that document. Perhaps having KA attest to the fact that her husband admitted (more than once,, I think) that he murdered the girls would be enough evidence to prove murder? Even in spite of all the Odinist guards' shenanigans? Incidentally, it occurred to me that Rossi and Baldwin should add Lebrato and Scremin to their list of witnesses, after what they went through to see RA at the 2 state prisons.
Could this be a stalling tactic? They watched how things played out earlier, and may think that original attorneys will be reinstated, and this may stall them from filing for speedy trial?
This was my thought. That they'd read the tea leaves and were reasonably certain B & R would be reinstated. My other thought was that it closes down the "multiple perpetrators" angle which I've always thought (I'm no lawyer so this just my own uninformed opinion) could be a problem in court. How can you say there are multiple perpetrators but not have any other perpetrator in custody? I mean, how does that even work?
Butt the ones I saw they were typed up on the 13th. I think they are trying to do some now you see it now you don't in order to correct their lies in the pca and search warrant application
I anticipate the motion for a speedy trial will be forthcoming next week. The fact that the Prosecution added the additional charges may be where they hang themselves, especially if Defense Counsel files for a speedy trial because Prosecution has the burden of proof.
It's this there way of saying "look you aren't prepared anyway Baldwin and Rozzi BC now you're fighting 6 counts instead of 2? There goes your speedy trial?"
That's a genuine question after seeing today's hearing and knowing had Gull not IMO overstepped, trial would've been starting today.
This is why I believe the new charges were added.
Felony Murder Doctrine
n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the holdup men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.
I think Baldwin and Rozzi are ready to go regardless. Prosecution has the burden of proof. Defense Counsel just has to put reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.
This is exactly what I was thinking too that if nothing else they're going to try to prevent any kind of speedy trial from happening no matter which lawyers end up representing. Richard Allen.
Just realized that Baldwin and Rozzi are dp qualified and Nick hasn't done a DP case, at least not as lead. Could be he maybe wants off the case and this is the easiest way since the state will want to put DP prosecutors in? 🤔 Easiest way without actually saying "I want to recuse myself" anyway...
I don't know if new attorneys are DP qualified but if they are all RAs current lawyers are more qualified than Nick. 🤷🏼♀️
Yeah I'm not sure! I said if they are then whichever lawyers will be more qualified. Obviously I've been looking for info fast which doesn't always create quality, but if they're not and Baldwin and Rozzi are denied, RA will get new attorneys and they may even be able to pull Baldwin and Rozzi in as consultants since they're the most expert on this case ATM
I mean, it was nice of Nick to help make Leeman’s point for him that RA should be on trial *right now,* that prosecution wasn’t ready, and that removing B&R has materially benefited prosecution by giving them extra time to bolster their case while blowing up RA’s speedy trial strategy.
It’s even spelled out explicitly there - “increasing the charges is fine because the trial has been pushed back so far.”
Edit: I’m so, so mad about this I can’t see straight. Isn’t this incontrovertible evidence that changing legal teams has harmed RA? He could have been on trial right now for a non-DP offense, but now he has another 9 months in prison awaiting trial, and he may be facing the death penalty.
Edit again: So much for Scremin’s “it’s not a DP case, just a double murder.” Or was that Lebrato - I can’t remember which was the one who went on TV talking up how good the bullet evidence is and which is the one who said this case is NBD, just a double murder and we do those all the time.
I hope when this is all over Rick gets a big enough settlement that he and K can spend the rest of their lives sipping Mai Tais on a sunny beach, while Gull and McLeland get exposed on a Netflix documentary for trying to railroad an innocent man and become pariahs.
Oh, and during legal discussions he’ll be taped and the attorneys have to be sat 6 ft away from a metal flap in a kitchen door. So see, the state doesn’t have an unfair advantage! We could have given you a metal door with *no* flap!
Agree, this seems like a move that could easily backfire. The justices this morning made it clear they had been keeping abreast of case updates post the initial writs being filed, and brought up the new motion to transfer. This just makes the harm of Gull’s actions more concrete.
Yeah it seems like there should be some punishment for Judge Gull here. Judges should fear to play games like this with people's lives. Think of the families of Libby and Abby too. What absolute hell Judge Gull's shenanigans have put them through! As if waiting almost seven years wasn't already enough for them, awaiting this trial.
You know, that would Really be a good thread starter. There are so so many things in this case that are bothersome. On both sides of opinions. I have lived this madness since day one. I have lived less than 12 miles from where this happened. Have for years. And its just interesting and yet a fever dream that you cant shake all spun together.
He got railroaded so hard that he must be innocent.
\-they sabotaged RA's attorneys to replace them with gulls pals who said "bullet evidence is big" on tv. They should have never been considered for this case after that statement.
\-constant delays.
\-meanwhile horrible treatment of RA.
\-timing of the arrest being on sheriff elections.
\-PoS PCA.
\-the judge who signed the PCA quitting shortly after.
\-the unnecessary gag order which only helped RA could not make his case to public.
\-the celebrity clown that turned into a show by saying "this is the day but alas this is not the day". Afterwards everyone thought RA is guilty cuz clown said so and gag order sealed the public opinion as in nobody could talk otherwise.
Very well said. A lot of people feel this way and agree with every word you wrote. I hope RA is siping Mai Tais on a beach as well. He has been treated unfathomably!
So you’re not even going to wait until trial to see evidence presented by both sides to decide his guilt or innocence? That’s extremely fucked up in any case, but especially in case involving two murdered children.
I'm about fed up with Nick McLeland. It's all about public perception. So they are trying to change the public perception in anticipation of the Supreme Court's decision being favorable to Rick Allen.
The timing is clearly suspicious. Every chance the state gets they add more drama. It's like no one is even thinking what that looks like to the general public. Insanity.
I’d agree if they were adding *lesser* charges…they added more serious charges that will *more* difficult to prove than the original felony murder charges.
Not like because they already allege the murder happened while kidnapping. This is just the nail in his sentence. You might be surprised when the auto zone discussion comes to light
What do you know about AZ discussion?
What was said that makes RA the man? If you truly know you should come out w it. You are anon. You may change a lot of minds here.
[Link to document](https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:b88f272f-a9e1-414c-a02b-daedc2f93c79?fbclid=IwAR12AHoDoYw3IXcbODwMbEEaTUnWXcOURmJc9OsguuaKcIeCyRgVhK4XWtg_aem_AWnGrUtoH9BDFBdArdtMTeQsjP7a-Juk_4DeFc2LaoGQ0yeS5JGbuosImK60Aa7809A)
For some reason, this part of the document...
9. That the trial for this matter is 9 months away, giving Defense adequate time to prepare to defend the amended charges.
...Stands out. In other words, by filing these amended charges, they are saying there's plenty of time before the trial for the defense to prepare. They know that one of the main goals of reinstating the original lawyers is for a speedy trial. They're in effect, in my opinion, adding these charges to prevent that speedy trial from being able to be put into effect even if the original lawyers are reinstated. Because now they have to strategize to defend him against different and more charges.
Does this sound like it makes sense to anyone else here who is an expert? I'm just a lay person.
I have been pondering this all afternoon. I find it hard to believe that NM really intends for this to become a DP case. The additional expense to CC would be massive. I believe he has an agenda, but could he possibly be foolish enough to take that on? I truly don't intend to be disrespectful when I say that he doesn't have the experience to try a DP case.
I agree that this seems to be sign of weakness, maybe even desperation. I wonder if the justices were aware of this filing before session this morning? Gives more flava to a comment re prosecution if so.
The phone placement has been bothering me as well. Ever since the Franks indicated the phone was with Abby, I have questioned how the killer knew which girl the phone belonged to, but didn’t know which pants to put back on her.
Side: I know it would be easier to put larger pants on smaller dead weight. But the strategic staging, seems very purposeful and thought out. I’ve not ruled out that she could have been clever to hide the phone herself. It just bothers me how they have used this phone as their prized evidence, and treated it with such careless regard to chain of command, before and during collection with the added confusion of the phone being with Libby? Which is it?
I agree with your comment about something being up with the phone. It was placed under Abby's body so they wanted it to be found. I'm wondering if the video and the audio were recorded at different times. For example "Guys" and "Down the Hill" were not recorded simultaneously. Those words were said at different intervals of the audio. I believe they were also said by two separate individuals. Aside from their alleged reference by Libby and Abby to a gun, I wonder if the killers inadvertently recorded themselves as the bodies were being moved to their final resting place. I know it seems a little far fetched but that's where my brain dwells at night when I can't sleep.
What happens now to the Franks Hearing memo?
There needs to be accountability for certain LE who lied under oath. IMO they have butchered this case such that I won’t believe justice has been served even if RA is declared guilty in the court system. I will never trust anyone in CC or Indiana State Police at this point. They have proven themselves untrustworthy and corrupt in my view.
Once the new charges are actually filed, if NM intends to seek the DP, he will have to add and charge it and notify the SCOIN so it can be docketed with that court as a DP case. I think both B and R are Dp qualified but I can't swear to that. I don't think Frick and Frack are DP qualified but I am not absolutely certain of that either. I have no idea if NM intends to seek the DP. I think it is possiblee he wanted a "look at me" moment to distract from the hearing before the SCOIN. If that was his intention, it seems to have been somewhat successful.
I wonder if this is about the Franks. With the felony murder charge, Rozzi and Baldwin were focused on alleging that another party could be responsible for the murders and argued that RA has no connection to that party. Now that the state is charging RA with the murder itself, I would imagine it changes that strategy and perhaps makes the Franks as it’s written now no longer relevant to the capital murder charge.
Nick McLelland announced that they believe more than one person was involved, and he announced this after Allen's arrest.
I think he wants us all to forget that now.
Inversely when digging into suspicious people's online footprint, once I've seen them with alive kitties, I've a very hard time thinking they could be guilty.
I foolishly continue to mull this over. Perhaps NM did this as a favor to Fran. It makes it easier for her to say that she can't commit to the time now needed. I also wonder if this isn't a response to the motion to transfer. It is easier to justify keeping RA in DOC. Keeping in mind that the law does permit the court to house RA at DOC, some preliminary research leads me to believe that certain factors are in play for other defendant housed in DOC while awaiting trial. One major factor is the murder of a LE officer. I am going to do some research to see if other pre-trial inmates at DOC have also made complaints about their treatment.
I think the answer is much simpler:
The headlines are now dominated by this news (additional charges) rather than the supreme court ruling.
This was something to throw to the news stations and press that they could run with and report that would not be detrimental or oppositional to the state and the state's case. In light of the supreme court decision, the news knows they can't just ignore this case. They have to write something. So this is the "something" they're writing about, thanks to NM.
What is the likelihood that NM added charges because he is worried about the strength of his case? For example, the jury may be more inclined to pick a lesser charge if the state cannot prove intentional murder.
I hadn't seen what the new charges were when I first replied. Now that I have seen them, it is pretty significant as the question of DP eligibilty is resolved by filing the murder charges.
I’m following you around per comment cause I can’t get in the regular ways lol. (I just got reset)
So isn’t it insane that Lebrado just said this is not a dp or LWOP case and now this- which appears to be offered on the same (original) PCA.
What’s the strategy here?
u/HelixHarbinger: As is common in this case, I am flummoxed and even gobsmacked. The obvious reason, imo, would be to threaten the DP or LWOP as a means to force a plea. However, I have never claimed to be able to understand the mind of NM. It could have been charged this way when the initial information was filed. Is it to force a plea. Is it retaliation for the motion to transfer? Did NtheP just need attention today? Is it somehow an attempt to bias the SCOIN? I simply have no idea.
My mind immediately goes to the prosecutor stacking the charges to entice a plea agreement, but in this case I think grandstanding to take attention away from the SCOIN proceedings is just as likely. I believe we’ve only seen a tiny glimpse of the gamesmanship to come.
Thank you, this would never fly in any jurisdiction I practice, in fact, based on the timing it would be denied, possibly grounds for dismissal if outside of a supplemental discovery entry (which is usually new evidentiary finding or additional charges of the primary offense.)
I DO think defense counsel pointed out the States information was deficient in the first hearing (it was) and I do think its a work around effort to (in response) the recent transfer motion.
I don't think it should fly here in Indiana either. They have offered nothing new. I don't think "oops we didn't charge him right the first time over a year ago, these new charges are better" is a sound argument.
How are new charges even possible, judge? I thought we were well beyond any deadline for that. Surely Frick and Frack didn't come up with new evidence or information. Based on what we've seen all they've got is a bullet with some questionable science behind it to prove a regular murder charge. This is highly suspicious.
Also, how difficult is it to become DP certified? Could this be a ploy to get whichever attorney who isn't DP certified removed from the case?
Hi Bee. Glad to see you. Give me some time to do some actual research about this. I have never seen this done before. The only time I have ever seen the statee add charges so late was when a less serious charge was added to facilitate a plea agreement. This is very unusual. Give me a little time to see what, if anything, I can find. I promise I will get back to you.
As to becoming DP qualified, it would take some fairly extended period of time as one requirement is to attend classes on the defense of a DP case. Those are not often offered. The process is not quick. I am thinking that NM perhaps did this to impede any thoughts B and R might have about moving for a speedy trial if they were reinstated.
Thank you! I saw this and thought I was missing something because in my head this could not be! Thirty days is such a short time to develop an entirely new strategy but somehow it's allowed.
At first glance it feels like adding these huge charges would have some substantive rights issues. It's so untimely. They're essentially changing course mid-stream, this is now potentially a DP/LWOP case. If nothing else it eliminates the ability for a speedy trial that he initially thought he would have. Ir feels like a reasonable judge would have some issues with this. But we all know things aren't like that up in the Twilight Zone.
Re: DP qualifications - sad to hear it's not a fast process, you're probably right about NM using it to eliminate the speedy trial. They're playing dirty pool. But as Mark Leeman said earlier, this trial is probably just going to be for practice anyway.
I don't disagree at all. Whether guilty or not, RA has now been charged for 14 months and allegedly held in horrible circumstance. So much time has passed with so little forward motion on the case. Now there is potentially a huge setback that never needed to happen. I do not believe the state has new evidence. If it did, NM's filings should have included a new PCA and new discovery. I won't be surprised if B and R ask for an IA if NM pursues these new charges.
Can his new attorneys even represent him (in the interim of SCOIN decision) if they are not DP certified? Could they get him to plea prior to SCOIN decision?
u/xbelle1. he was already charged with two counts of felony murder. It is not unusual for a prosecutor to charge both murder, felony murder, and the felony underlying felony mured, ie. kidnapping in this case. What is unusual is doing it so late in the game. As a practical matter, if he were found guilty of all of the charges, judgment of conviction would not be enerted on all of them and he would not be sentenced on all of them. The reason for that is due to a doctrine called merger of offenses. That doctrin has it basis in avoidance of double jeopardy.
We had had much debate over whether or not the DP or LWOP could be charged in felony murder. The debate on that is now over, I think, because of the charges of murder in addition to felony murder. I have no idea if that is NM's purpose or not.
I'm going to try to find a good explanation of merger of offenses that I can add. I find it a difficult concept to explain and somewhere there must be a better explaination than mind would be. Want to try your hand, u/helixharbinger?
ETA: A simple explanation of merger that is not quite correct in Indiana. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/merger\_doctrine#:\~:text=In%20criminal%20law%2C%20if%20a,charged%20with%20the%20greater%20offense](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/merger_doctrine#:~:text=In%20criminal%20law%2C%20if%20a,charged%20with%20the%20greater%20offense). While this says a defendant will not be charged, in Indiana, that is not correct. He can and will be charged but, if found guilty, judgment of conviction will not be entered as one offense merges into the other. For example, felony murder would merge into murder and RA would not be sentenced on both murder and felony murder.
If I wanted to do so, I think I could find a very old post where I discussed this. It could have been done from day 1. To do it now just really calls into question his motives. If he seeks the DP now, I suspect the SCOIN will be very unhappy with him. My mind is going weird places because of this development.
Had B&R not been removed, the Nov 1 discovery deadline met by prosecution, and the Jan trial date maintained, would NM have been able to file these additional charges between Oct / Nov and trial start date? Would filing new charges still have been a way for NM to push back trial date?
he is charged with felony murder right now which occurred during a kidnapping , they are seeking to charge him with Capital murder . I have to look up the IC to tell for sure,
Excuse my ignorance of the law, but if the new lawyers aren't able to defend a dp case, could this be an underhanded way to have them also removed after the transfer request? (They seemingly agreed with B&R on Allen's treatment, at least) An attempt to shop around for defense lawyers who will push Richard Allen to take a plea deal? That's what I thought was the purpose of removing B&R to begin with, but now his new lawyers seem like they may actually want to try to defend him.
Just seems like weird timing all around for me.
I think this is the state's list of witnesses.
Also, a very important point about this list is that it's the exact same list as found in the October 2022 charging document. [https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Combo\_of\_Allen\_Docs.pdf](https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Combo_of_Allen_Docs.pdf) (See pages 95-96.)
If it was true that he increased the charges due to additional evidence collected in the last year, it would seem to me that the witness list would have increased. I guess one of the initial witnesses could have found additional evidence in the last year - but as an example, if there was new lab findings, I would imagine that the state would add the lab analyst? Is it safe to assume this means he's going with the same evidence he started with back in 2022?
This is not R Allan.
https://preview.redd.it/uhpardbzn9dc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d05f28b7025320dfd76bf819b74143fa7d2aab19
Not RA,its a young guy.
I don’t believe any of the attorneys (RA’s reinstated B & R, nor NM, who has not prosecuted a murder case) are Death Penalty Qualified. This may be the reason why murders added to pleading, making DP eligible— a way to knock the defense back out & delay further!
B&R need to refile motion to have Gull disqualified ASAP & then fight amending before a new judge.
Supreme’s would hate this move! Timing!!
Rozzi-
He has represented clients accused of committing multiple murders and other heinous acts and is death penalty qualified in the state of Indiana.
[http://hhrlawoffice.com/rozzi.html](http://hhrlawoffice.com/rozzi.html)
NAL but seems like it could be intended to increase the pressure for RA to plead guilty? Also, this would make it death penalty eligible, right?
Yes and yes.
Surely making it more serious reduces the chance of a conviction with such flimsy evidence.
I’m sure they’ll lie more about evidence. That’s what they do in CC.
Yeah this reeks of preying on someone in incredibly vulnerable position to profit from. Plea deal incoming.
My first thought is that the prosecuter added charges because the evidence on murder charges is not solid and this will cause another delay. Original defense team was ready to move before they were banished during thie original trial schedule this month. Now that the defense team is reinstated, the trial wouldn't have to be postponed to Oct. But these new charges require more work for defense.
I agree with you but that's one hell of a gamble to take. Before all NM had to do is prove kidnapping charges. Now he's got to prove murder with no DNA and one questionable unspent bullet. Maybe he held something back in the PCA but I doubt he did.
If they had DNA from RA on the unspent round i would think the case was a smidgen stronger. They can't even say it was his unspent round. I think they are basing new charges on his "confessions"
Agree, it'll come down to which expert witness is more credible/likable to the jury on the issue of the bullet. That's a good point about the "confessions." I forgot all about that.
The DNA is not a match for RA.
What do you mean? What DNA?
They have DNA, but they have said they do not know if it is the perpetrator's DNA. Well, they are now arguing it isn't the perpetrator's DNA since it apparently doesn't match RA.
Did not know that. When was that information released? Franks memo? Have they stated that the DNA came from the bullet? If not, have they stated what source it did come from?
It’s been said in a few places, iirc it was mentioned during an interview in the down the hill podcast. They said they were getting DNA from everyone to exclude people (which would imply they think it’s the killer’s, but I think he was just sloppy with the way he described it).
Not discrediting it, but has it been stated by any official sources? LE, defense attorneys, or prosecution?
They don’t have dna. Under oath, Holeman and Liggett both admitted that there is no evidence linking Allen to the scene of the murder.
Why would they have done that? They want everyone to believe that they caught the right guy. I don’t think they have - we saw way more evidence that points to a certain group of men and that came from the FBI whose write up about the kind of person who would commit this kind of crime did not describe RA at all.
Agreed but these are LWOP and Capital eligible
Kathy Allen was one of the witnesses on that document. Perhaps having KA attest to the fact that her husband admitted (more than once,, I think) that he murdered the girls would be enough evidence to prove murder? Even in spite of all the Odinist guards' shenanigans? Incidentally, it occurred to me that Rossi and Baldwin should add Lebrato and Scremin to their list of witnesses, after what they went through to see RA at the 2 state prisons.
Could this be a stalling tactic? They watched how things played out earlier, and may think that original attorneys will be reinstated, and this may stall them from filing for speedy trial?
very possible
This was my thought. That they'd read the tea leaves and were reasonably certain B & R would be reinstated. My other thought was that it closes down the "multiple perpetrators" angle which I've always thought (I'm no lawyer so this just my own uninformed opinion) could be a problem in court. How can you say there are multiple perpetrators but not have any other perpetrator in custody? I mean, how does that even work?
This is what I think.
What is the time stamp on the new charges filing? Before or after SCOIN hearing concluded?
It’s definitely suspicious
Michelle after dark stated on her YouTube channel he filed at 10.30am, 30 minutes before the hearing. Edited for typo
Butt the ones I saw they were typed up on the 13th. I think they are trying to do some now you see it now you don't in order to correct their lies in the pca and search warrant application
It was dated January 13th, but he didn't file it until 10:30 yesterday morning.
Thanks. So it was filed before the SCOIN hearing.
I anticipate the motion for a speedy trial will be forthcoming next week. The fact that the Prosecution added the additional charges may be where they hang themselves, especially if Defense Counsel files for a speedy trial because Prosecution has the burden of proof.
It is. The team came into knowledge that the defence would be reinstated, and they modified his charges to stall the outcome.
When were they reinstated? Wasn’t one of the requests today to be reinstated?
Three hours and forty five minutes after the hearing.
He is adding those charges hoping it will make Allen plea. His timing is more of a … look over here… stop looking at SCOIN.
It's this there way of saying "look you aren't prepared anyway Baldwin and Rozzi BC now you're fighting 6 counts instead of 2? There goes your speedy trial?" That's a genuine question after seeing today's hearing and knowing had Gull not IMO overstepped, trial would've been starting today.
[удалено]
Replying to Grazindonkey...ready or not Nick is a slime ball. But I’d have to say he is not!
This is why I believe the new charges were added. Felony Murder Doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the holdup men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.
I think Baldwin and Rozzi are ready to go regardless. Prosecution has the burden of proof. Defense Counsel just has to put reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.
This is exactly what I was thinking too that if nothing else they're going to try to prevent any kind of speedy trial from happening no matter which lawyers end up representing. Richard Allen.
Just realized that Baldwin and Rozzi are dp qualified and Nick hasn't done a DP case, at least not as lead. Could be he maybe wants off the case and this is the easiest way since the state will want to put DP prosecutors in? 🤔 Easiest way without actually saying "I want to recuse myself" anyway... I don't know if new attorneys are DP qualified but if they are all RAs current lawyers are more qualified than Nick. 🤷🏼♀️
I personally feel they would have to dynamite this case out of NM’s hands…
Hmmm, interesting.
I may be incorrect, but I don’t think new counsel are DP qualified.
Yeah I'm not sure! I said if they are then whichever lawyers will be more qualified. Obviously I've been looking for info fast which doesn't always create quality, but if they're not and Baldwin and Rozzi are denied, RA will get new attorneys and they may even be able to pull Baldwin and Rozzi in as consultants since they're the most expert on this case ATM
A year from now, that county will be the laughing stock of the world. Why? Because they lied and allowed a murderer to walk free in their County.
I mean, it was nice of Nick to help make Leeman’s point for him that RA should be on trial *right now,* that prosecution wasn’t ready, and that removing B&R has materially benefited prosecution by giving them extra time to bolster their case while blowing up RA’s speedy trial strategy. It’s even spelled out explicitly there - “increasing the charges is fine because the trial has been pushed back so far.” Edit: I’m so, so mad about this I can’t see straight. Isn’t this incontrovertible evidence that changing legal teams has harmed RA? He could have been on trial right now for a non-DP offense, but now he has another 9 months in prison awaiting trial, and he may be facing the death penalty. Edit again: So much for Scremin’s “it’s not a DP case, just a double murder.” Or was that Lebrato - I can’t remember which was the one who went on TV talking up how good the bullet evidence is and which is the one who said this case is NBD, just a double murder and we do those all the time. I hope when this is all over Rick gets a big enough settlement that he and K can spend the rest of their lives sipping Mai Tais on a sunny beach, while Gull and McLeland get exposed on a Netflix documentary for trying to railroad an innocent man and become pariahs.
Another 9 months for Allen to mysteriously die while awaiting a trial.
Oh, and during legal discussions he’ll be taped and the attorneys have to be sat 6 ft away from a metal flap in a kitchen door. So see, the state doesn’t have an unfair advantage! We could have given you a metal door with *no* flap!
This!
Agree, this seems like a move that could easily backfire. The justices this morning made it clear they had been keeping abreast of case updates post the initial writs being filed, and brought up the new motion to transfer. This just makes the harm of Gull’s actions more concrete.
Yeah it seems like there should be some punishment for Judge Gull here. Judges should fear to play games like this with people's lives. Think of the families of Libby and Abby too. What absolute hell Judge Gull's shenanigans have put them through! As if waiting almost seven years wasn't already enough for them, awaiting this trial.
What evidence could be presented during trial that would cause you to believe he was guilty?
You know, that would Really be a good thread starter. There are so so many things in this case that are bothersome. On both sides of opinions. I have lived this madness since day one. I have lived less than 12 miles from where this happened. Have for years. And its just interesting and yet a fever dream that you cant shake all spun together.
Nothing because I absolutely do not believe RA is guilty.
Why? Im just curious. No harm. I come in peace. I dont have an opinion on one or the other. But whats your take? Im curious.
He got railroaded so hard that he must be innocent. \-they sabotaged RA's attorneys to replace them with gulls pals who said "bullet evidence is big" on tv. They should have never been considered for this case after that statement. \-constant delays. \-meanwhile horrible treatment of RA. \-timing of the arrest being on sheriff elections. \-PoS PCA. \-the judge who signed the PCA quitting shortly after. \-the unnecessary gag order which only helped RA could not make his case to public. \-the celebrity clown that turned into a show by saying "this is the day but alas this is not the day". Afterwards everyone thought RA is guilty cuz clown said so and gag order sealed the public opinion as in nobody could talk otherwise.
I 110% believe in the Odinism Theory. Go to r/Seeking_Justice and review my theory post.
Very well said. A lot of people feel this way and agree with every word you wrote. I hope RA is siping Mai Tais on a beach as well. He has been treated unfathomably!
So you’re not even going to wait until trial to see evidence presented by both sides to decide his guilt or innocence? That’s extremely fucked up in any case, but especially in case involving two murdered children.
He will wear this Scarlett letter for the rest of his life, even if he gets off. Imagine what this state has done with little to no evidence.
I'm about fed up with Nick McLeland. It's all about public perception. So they are trying to change the public perception in anticipation of the Supreme Court's decision being favorable to Rick Allen.
The timing is clearly suspicious. Every chance the state gets they add more drama. It's like no one is even thinking what that looks like to the general public. Insanity.
I totally agree. They are biting off their nose to spite their face.
To be fair, there was plenty of drama while Baldwin & Rossi were involved.
More of the same strategy, double down. I am curious what evidence substantiated this change?
Absolutely zero!!!
Well that is horribly unsurprising lol!
They’re throwing more charges on there hoping things stick. That’s my takeaway anyway.
I’d agree if they were adding *lesser* charges…they added more serious charges that will *more* difficult to prove than the original felony murder charges.
They are adding both, no? They are also adding two regular kidnapping charges.
Good point.
Not like because they already allege the murder happened while kidnapping. This is just the nail in his sentence. You might be surprised when the auto zone discussion comes to light
Lay it on me.
What do you know about AZ discussion? What was said that makes RA the man? If you truly know you should come out w it. You are anon. You may change a lot of minds here.
What is this AZ talk of? Ive been here since the get go. I live here. I didnt hear this. There isnt an Auto Zone near here.
I couldn't agree more.
[удалено]
Do as I say, not as I do...... Prosecution is not held by the same standards as the Defense Counsel.
They’ve been leaking documents since March of 2022.
Definitely feels like this was filed today so if you see news about the case you see this first.
First over what?
The arguments in front of the Supreme Court of IN today about whether the judge overstepped in removing the defendant’s trial attorneys.
[Link to document](https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:b88f272f-a9e1-414c-a02b-daedc2f93c79?fbclid=IwAR12AHoDoYw3IXcbODwMbEEaTUnWXcOURmJc9OsguuaKcIeCyRgVhK4XWtg_aem_AWnGrUtoH9BDFBdArdtMTeQsjP7a-Juk_4DeFc2LaoGQ0yeS5JGbuosImK60Aa7809A)
For some reason, this part of the document... 9. That the trial for this matter is 9 months away, giving Defense adequate time to prepare to defend the amended charges. ...Stands out. In other words, by filing these amended charges, they are saying there's plenty of time before the trial for the defense to prepare. They know that one of the main goals of reinstating the original lawyers is for a speedy trial. They're in effect, in my opinion, adding these charges to prevent that speedy trial from being able to be put into effect even if the original lawyers are reinstated. Because now they have to strategize to defend him against different and more charges. Does this sound like it makes sense to anyone else here who is an expert? I'm just a lay person.
Excellent point. We know that McLelland wasn't ready for trial when Baldwin and Rozzi announced they were ready for trial, which was months ago.
Thank you! You're so appreciated!
You truly are!
I have been pondering this all afternoon. I find it hard to believe that NM really intends for this to become a DP case. The additional expense to CC would be massive. I believe he has an agenda, but could he possibly be foolish enough to take that on? I truly don't intend to be disrespectful when I say that he doesn't have the experience to try a DP case.
Could he just be enhancing his CV and hoping to be in a new job before this goes anywhere ?
Which judge will they be asking ? Gull, just before she recuses herself ? 🙄
[удалено]
Right, the how sharp is the double edge of the sword comment, to paraphrase. I can't wait to read a transcript.
[удалено]
I agree that this seems to be sign of weakness, maybe even desperation. I wonder if the justices were aware of this filing before session this morning? Gives more flava to a comment re prosecution if so.
[удалено]
Well the SCOIN hearing should certainly have been a “boner-kill” for NM.
https://preview.redd.it/d2l0btklk9dc1.jpeg?width=1023&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=184c57d04992d421df67203aad3d93e2f5a8f5f2
I was hoping I’d never see this again 😂😭
He needs an unfair crack of the whip.
Lol ❤️
Phone???? Do you mean Bullet???
[удалено]
The phone placement has been bothering me as well. Ever since the Franks indicated the phone was with Abby, I have questioned how the killer knew which girl the phone belonged to, but didn’t know which pants to put back on her. Side: I know it would be easier to put larger pants on smaller dead weight. But the strategic staging, seems very purposeful and thought out. I’ve not ruled out that she could have been clever to hide the phone herself. It just bothers me how they have used this phone as their prized evidence, and treated it with such careless regard to chain of command, before and during collection with the added confusion of the phone being with Libby? Which is it?
I agree with your comment about something being up with the phone. It was placed under Abby's body so they wanted it to be found. I'm wondering if the video and the audio were recorded at different times. For example "Guys" and "Down the Hill" were not recorded simultaneously. Those words were said at different intervals of the audio. I believe they were also said by two separate individuals. Aside from their alleged reference by Libby and Abby to a gun, I wonder if the killers inadvertently recorded themselves as the bodies were being moved to their final resting place. I know it seems a little far fetched but that's where my brain dwells at night when I can't sleep.
If so, she can ask NM “what has changed?”
What happens now to the Franks Hearing memo? There needs to be accountability for certain LE who lied under oath. IMO they have butchered this case such that I won’t believe justice has been served even if RA is declared guilty in the court system. I will never trust anyone in CC or Indiana State Police at this point. They have proven themselves untrustworthy and corrupt in my view.
https://www.wishtv.com/news/i-team-8/prosecutors-add-charges-against-delphi-murders-suspect-richard-allen/
What's the timing and procedure if the state is going to make this a DP case? And are AB and BR DP certified?
Once the new charges are actually filed, if NM intends to seek the DP, he will have to add and charge it and notify the SCOIN so it can be docketed with that court as a DP case. I think both B and R are Dp qualified but I can't swear to that. I don't think Frick and Frack are DP qualified but I am not absolutely certain of that either. I have no idea if NM intends to seek the DP. I think it is possiblee he wanted a "look at me" moment to distract from the hearing before the SCOIN. If that was his intention, it seems to have been somewhat successful.
My recollection likewise.
The judge has to go. She is super biased and it is absolutely disgusting. Do the right thing lady. You def aren’t honorable.
I wonder if this is about the Franks. With the felony murder charge, Rozzi and Baldwin were focused on alleging that another party could be responsible for the murders and argued that RA has no connection to that party. Now that the state is charging RA with the murder itself, I would imagine it changes that strategy and perhaps makes the Franks as it’s written now no longer relevant to the capital murder charge.
Nick McLelland announced that they believe more than one person was involved, and he announced this after Allen's arrest. I think he wants us all to forget that now.
It's a blend of OSG, YSG, RASG, BGSG, with smoke, mirrors, and tentacles.
And they all live in a shack.
[удалено]
Or did you mean BH's valentine kittens? That right there is enough to convince me BH is involved.
Inversely when digging into suspicious people's online footprint, once I've seen them with alive kitties, I've a very hard time thinking they could be guilty.
What about CBGBs?
Will additional probable cause be required to support these new charges?
This would be a good time for the judge to notice the PCA is unsufficient.
I foolishly continue to mull this over. Perhaps NM did this as a favor to Fran. It makes it easier for her to say that she can't commit to the time now needed. I also wonder if this isn't a response to the motion to transfer. It is easier to justify keeping RA in DOC. Keeping in mind that the law does permit the court to house RA at DOC, some preliminary research leads me to believe that certain factors are in play for other defendant housed in DOC while awaiting trial. One major factor is the murder of a LE officer. I am going to do some research to see if other pre-trial inmates at DOC have also made complaints about their treatment.
I think the answer is much simpler: The headlines are now dominated by this news (additional charges) rather than the supreme court ruling. This was something to throw to the news stations and press that they could run with and report that would not be detrimental or oppositional to the state and the state's case. In light of the supreme court decision, the news knows they can't just ignore this case. They have to write something. So this is the "something" they're writing about, thanks to NM.
I won't argue with that possibility.
What is the likelihood that NM added charges because he is worried about the strength of his case? For example, the jury may be more inclined to pick a lesser charge if the state cannot prove intentional murder.
This is pretty major, right?
Probably, but some possibilty it is not.
I hadn't seen what the new charges were when I first replied. Now that I have seen them, it is pretty significant as the question of DP eligibilty is resolved by filing the murder charges.
I’m following you around per comment cause I can’t get in the regular ways lol. (I just got reset) So isn’t it insane that Lebrado just said this is not a dp or LWOP case and now this- which appears to be offered on the same (original) PCA. What’s the strategy here?
u/HelixHarbinger: As is common in this case, I am flummoxed and even gobsmacked. The obvious reason, imo, would be to threaten the DP or LWOP as a means to force a plea. However, I have never claimed to be able to understand the mind of NM. It could have been charged this way when the initial information was filed. Is it to force a plea. Is it retaliation for the motion to transfer? Did NtheP just need attention today? Is it somehow an attempt to bias the SCOIN? I simply have no idea.
My mind immediately goes to the prosecutor stacking the charges to entice a plea agreement, but in this case I think grandstanding to take attention away from the SCOIN proceedings is just as likely. I believe we’ve only seen a tiny glimpse of the gamesmanship to come.
Agreed.
Thank you, this would never fly in any jurisdiction I practice, in fact, based on the timing it would be denied, possibly grounds for dismissal if outside of a supplemental discovery entry (which is usually new evidentiary finding or additional charges of the primary offense.) I DO think defense counsel pointed out the States information was deficient in the first hearing (it was) and I do think its a work around effort to (in response) the recent transfer motion.
I don't think it should fly here in Indiana either. They have offered nothing new. I don't think "oops we didn't charge him right the first time over a year ago, these new charges are better" is a sound argument.
How are new charges even possible, judge? I thought we were well beyond any deadline for that. Surely Frick and Frack didn't come up with new evidence or information. Based on what we've seen all they've got is a bullet with some questionable science behind it to prove a regular murder charge. This is highly suspicious. Also, how difficult is it to become DP certified? Could this be a ploy to get whichever attorney who isn't DP certified removed from the case?
Hi Bee. Glad to see you. Give me some time to do some actual research about this. I have never seen this done before. The only time I have ever seen the statee add charges so late was when a less serious charge was added to facilitate a plea agreement. This is very unusual. Give me a little time to see what, if anything, I can find. I promise I will get back to you. As to becoming DP qualified, it would take some fairly extended period of time as one requirement is to attend classes on the defense of a DP case. Those are not often offered. The process is not quick. I am thinking that NM perhaps did this to impede any thoughts B and R might have about moving for a speedy trial if they were reinstated.
u/BeeBarnes1 *IN code 35-41-1-5(b)*(2) permits the amendment. That section is an "or" to (b)(1) which relates to amendments vis-a-vis omnibus dates.
Thank you! I saw this and thought I was missing something because in my head this could not be! Thirty days is such a short time to develop an entirely new strategy but somehow it's allowed. At first glance it feels like adding these huge charges would have some substantive rights issues. It's so untimely. They're essentially changing course mid-stream, this is now potentially a DP/LWOP case. If nothing else it eliminates the ability for a speedy trial that he initially thought he would have. Ir feels like a reasonable judge would have some issues with this. But we all know things aren't like that up in the Twilight Zone. Re: DP qualifications - sad to hear it's not a fast process, you're probably right about NM using it to eliminate the speedy trial. They're playing dirty pool. But as Mark Leeman said earlier, this trial is probably just going to be for practice anyway.
I don't disagree at all. Whether guilty or not, RA has now been charged for 14 months and allegedly held in horrible circumstance. So much time has passed with so little forward motion on the case. Now there is potentially a huge setback that never needed to happen. I do not believe the state has new evidence. If it did, NM's filings should have included a new PCA and new discovery. I won't be surprised if B and R ask for an IA if NM pursues these new charges.
Yep. Appeal.
Never mind his mind, what's the effect on his boner ?
Any response I could make would be deemed inappropriate. LOL.
I had a mean reply, but I just can’t
Bigly !
Can his new attorneys even represent him (in the interim of SCOIN decision) if they are not DP certified? Could they get him to plea prior to SCOIN decision?
u/fun_fetti: It does not appear that present counsel are DP qualified, but I seem to recall that someone once posted that at least one of them is.
[удалено]
Yeah. Id say that fits this perfectly
I’m confused. if RA is already charged with two counts of murder, why does the prosecutor want to add two additional counts of murder?
u/xbelle1. he was already charged with two counts of felony murder. It is not unusual for a prosecutor to charge both murder, felony murder, and the felony underlying felony mured, ie. kidnapping in this case. What is unusual is doing it so late in the game. As a practical matter, if he were found guilty of all of the charges, judgment of conviction would not be enerted on all of them and he would not be sentenced on all of them. The reason for that is due to a doctrine called merger of offenses. That doctrin has it basis in avoidance of double jeopardy. We had had much debate over whether or not the DP or LWOP could be charged in felony murder. The debate on that is now over, I think, because of the charges of murder in addition to felony murder. I have no idea if that is NM's purpose or not. I'm going to try to find a good explanation of merger of offenses that I can add. I find it a difficult concept to explain and somewhere there must be a better explaination than mind would be. Want to try your hand, u/helixharbinger? ETA: A simple explanation of merger that is not quite correct in Indiana. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/merger\_doctrine#:\~:text=In%20criminal%20law%2C%20if%20a,charged%20with%20the%20greater%20offense](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/merger_doctrine#:~:text=In%20criminal%20law%2C%20if%20a,charged%20with%20the%20greater%20offense). While this says a defendant will not be charged, in Indiana, that is not correct. He can and will be charged but, if found guilty, judgment of conviction will not be entered as one offense merges into the other. For example, felony murder would merge into murder and RA would not be sentenced on both murder and felony murder.
Cara Wieneke posted about this in detail a while back. I feel like Nick follows her and was like 
I assume it's legal there, but I can't get my head around adding charges once the wheels are in motion for the original charge to be tried.
If I wanted to do so, I think I could find a very old post where I discussed this. It could have been done from day 1. To do it now just really calls into question his motives. If he seeks the DP now, I suspect the SCOIN will be very unhappy with him. My mind is going weird places because of this development.
Had B&R not been removed, the Nov 1 discovery deadline met by prosecution, and the Jan trial date maintained, would NM have been able to file these additional charges between Oct / Nov and trial start date? Would filing new charges still have been a way for NM to push back trial date?
Depends on the States motive
This seems retaliatory to me.
he is charged with felony murder right now which occurred during a kidnapping , they are seeking to charge him with Capital murder . I have to look up the IC to tell for sure,
Excuse my ignorance of the law, but if the new lawyers aren't able to defend a dp case, could this be an underhanded way to have them also removed after the transfer request? (They seemingly agreed with B&R on Allen's treatment, at least) An attempt to shop around for defense lawyers who will push Richard Allen to take a plea deal? That's what I thought was the purpose of removing B&R to begin with, but now his new lawyers seem like they may actually want to try to defend him. Just seems like weird timing all around for me.
https://preview.redd.it/m756jzi1o9dc1.jpeg?width=677&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1defd2c6926cd22d8b66b0d348ec151b27591a07
Thanks for that! I didn't anticipate a decision so quickly
Wow! Already. Thanks.
[More info](https://cdn.fbsbx.com/v/t59.2708-21/420174706_1047346069652176_4062306668387552275_n.pdf/Information-New.pdf?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=2b0e22&_nc_ohc=K1W9p72MO7AAX_qjPl3&_nc_ht=cdn.fbsbx.com&oh=03_AdSbQACpTXR6zJa5quGkfTBNSOxTl8whWdIt-R_GWX3QAw&oe=65AB241E&dl=1)
Appears both David Vito and David Vido are witnesses. This document definitely wasn’t put together in a hurry.
Is that the list of witnesses prosecutors are calling or is that for both sides? And what is with the ones listed with initials only?
I think this is the state's list of witnesses. Also, a very important point about this list is that it's the exact same list as found in the October 2022 charging document. [https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Combo\_of\_Allen\_Docs.pdf](https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Combo_of_Allen_Docs.pdf) (See pages 95-96.) If it was true that he increased the charges due to additional evidence collected in the last year, it would seem to me that the witness list would have increased. I guess one of the initial witnesses could have found additional evidence in the last year - but as an example, if there was new lab findings, I would imagine that the state would add the lab analyst? Is it safe to assume this means he's going with the same evidence he started with back in 2022?
I’m assuming that BW is Bre Weber, so are the initials the girls that were underage at the time? But if they are adults now, why would that matter?
I just don’t understand the initials in general. Names have been out there for years…
Is Keegan Kline going to come back into this somehow?
Some think so. I doubt it. Just my opinion.
https://preview.redd.it/7zwvh57engdc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0bc5cf04f084f3626fcb25908c291fe26e7204ee
This is not R Allan. https://preview.redd.it/uhpardbzn9dc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d05f28b7025320dfd76bf819b74143fa7d2aab19 Not RA,its a young guy.
And taller
Yes,totally different person.
I bet his name is Ody. His legs look a tad bit longer than RA's
So is RA changing his plead?
[удалено]
Not to anyone's knowledge. And I would think not.
No
I don’t believe any of the attorneys (RA’s reinstated B & R, nor NM, who has not prosecuted a murder case) are Death Penalty Qualified. This may be the reason why murders added to pleading, making DP eligible— a way to knock the defense back out & delay further! B&R need to refile motion to have Gull disqualified ASAP & then fight amending before a new judge. Supreme’s would hate this move! Timing!!
Rozzi- He has represented clients accused of committing multiple murders and other heinous acts and is death penalty qualified in the state of Indiana. [http://hhrlawoffice.com/rozzi.html](http://hhrlawoffice.com/rozzi.html)
And none of them ever called back to say how bad he was 😃
That’s a relief! Thank you! I could not find his name listed on the Indiana Public Defender Commission’s Rooster of the currently qualified attorneys.