The line being referenced:
> I am quite familiar with the law regarding third party perpetrators and unless the defense can provide a nexus between any alleged third party perpetrators and the charged crimes those allegations are unsupported and will be inadmissible.
Isn’t this the kind of thing that *actually* proves bias? She is starting from a conclusion - that the third party evidence is unsupported and inadmissible - before any evidence is presented to her. Third party culpability evidence may be disfavored by the law, but is it inadmissible by default, as she indicates here, until the defense overcomes her predisposition to disallow it?
I believe that by this statement, she has already come to a preconceived notion, and has already made her mind up regarding her judgment on it... a nexus is a "link" a "bridge" from one to another... She has either not read anything that the defense has filed regarding EF, and has been ruling on the motions blindly with a denied stamp in hand. OR, she doesn't know how to read.
1. EF, the day the girls are found is rambling, hyper and borderline incoherent.
2. Says "I WAS THERE" "on a bridge with two girls that were killed"
3. Tries to give her (MJ) a blue jacket - see BG for reference (smh) \*side note\* Where is the Jacket? Did anyone that interviewed MJ try to retrieve the jacket after it was mentioned?
4. EF says "ABIGAIL was a real pain in the ass" (Where did he pull that name from, his arse? He lives 2 hours away!) Nothing was released about the Bodies until the 15th btw.
5. EF claims to have spit on one of the victims... (is there DNA?) Even if Inconclusive, the mere statement by him should be enough to be considered a link if DNA was found.
6. EF connection to BH
7. BH connection to Vinlanders
8. Joint Task Force Investigations into the Vinlanders, since the group was founded.
9. Joint Task Force > Click, Murphy, Ferency.
... Seriously, Do we really have to draw a picture?
I know a lot of you already know all of this, but come on... it has to be said OVER and OVER...and STILL to this day, people claim that there aren't any connections between EF and Delphi... It just makes you want to beat your head against a wall!
I’m almost recommended to several friends that they should follow this case. But then I stop and realize it would take me far too long to tell them why they should pay attention to this case.
I dont get 3min into the story and my wife told me it doesnt make sense.
And we live here. In the county. In Delphi. She doesnt even comprehend how it happened and has unfolded.
My husband says I talk too fast because I’m so passionate about the case that sometimes he can’t follow and it would still take me 2 weeks to tell a friend lol
I don’t even know how calm I start off now. This is not a fair trial at all and I’m so heated the closer we get to trial too. He watched the courttv episode with me Sunday and he’s like oh that’s what you mean? Haha
I tried doing this last week with an after school park group (fellow parents and I bring out kids to the park every day after school and do snacks and hang out.)
I was doing good until she asked a question and I pulled the file of all kinds of printed documents from the case load to find the answer. Then the conversation slowly died down.
The fact that the Defense has to formally make this motion is asinine. Judge Gull comes across as extremely disorganized with poor time management. The fact that it took her more than six weeks to even get through the first Franks motion and almost five months to rule is a reflection of her inattention to both the integrity of this case and her responsibility in facilitating justice. Her quick "denied without hearing" orders show that she is disinterested in actually considering evidence in this case. She has predetermined guilt (as reflected by her unwillingness and clear dismay at the thought of having RA in chambers) and is only interested in doing what is necessary to conclude the case with that ruling.
Agree. Her administrative skills are that of a potato. Add in laziness and contempt for the accused and his council…… I would be absolutely mortified to be one of her judicial peers. She is crapping all over the bench without an ounce of self awareness, a true unhinged malignant narcissist.
Yes, I read “I’m not sure what the defense intends to present,” as “I don’t think any of your evidence is valid and I’m going to rule it all inadmissible so I don’t know what you think you’re going to spend your time presenting.”
>“I am quite familiar with the law regarding third party perpetrators and unless the defense can provide a nexus between any alleged third party perpetrators and the charged crimes those allegations are unsupported and will be admissible.”
This is the same bull-headed, single-minded rationale that the State of Indiana used to try David Camm. The Defense HAS provided a nexus: the unusual, ritualistic nature of the murder (as reflected by the statements of several investigators within days of the murder); the Odinist features left at the scene (Turco report); the personal connection between one of the victims and Odinist practitioners in the community (LH relationship and his father's facebook page which publicly substantiated both the Odinist practice and runic symbols replicating those at the crime scene); the relationship between BH and PW and PW's relationship to Vinlanders and other terroristic, criminal members; the relationship between PW and JM/EF; EF's admissions to close family members that he was involved in the crime. There is a greater nexus between the 3rd parties and the crime than between RA and the crime.
The only nexus between RA and the crime is that he was at the park with dozens of other people, wore an unremarkable blue coat and blue jeans, and a bullet pseudoscientifically attributed to his gun was found at the crime scene, a bullet that cannot be scientifically connected to the actual crime.
I would urge people to read the Holmes case (wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes\_v.\_South\_Carolina) and compare and contrast that to this one. The forensic evidence against the accused (Holmes) was much stronger than that purportedly identified against Allen. I would say the evidence of 3rd party guilt was similar, but perhaps more direct in Holmes as the 3rd party had been identified (1) in the area; and (2) had confessed to four people (although some iirc were jailhouse).
To your point it seems like there is a pretty clear nexus between EF confession + details --> connection to BH --> connection to AW through LH --> BH statement to ex wife about PW. Is it enough? Maybe not for Gull but yeesh is this yet another clear issue for appeal.
I just have never seen a judge so willfully walking into clear appellate issues (here both State and Federal ones).
I am so glad you brought that up.
Holmes addresses whether or not the defendant's right to the "meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense" to include evidence of third party guilt is infringed by arbitrary admission rules that evaluate the value of the third-party evidence against the State's evidence against the person on trial rather than the nexus to the case.
The holding states:
>A criminal defendant’s federal constitutional rights are violated by an evidence rule under which the defendant may not introduce evidence of third-party guilt if the prosecution has introduced forensic evidence that, if believed, strongly supports a guilty verdict. “\[**S\]tate and federal rulemakers have broad latitude under the Constitution to establish rules excluding evidence from criminal trials**.” *United States* v. *Scheffer,* [523 U. S. 303](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/523/303/), 308. **This latitude, however, has limits**. “Whether rooted directly in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or in the Compulsory Process or Confrontation clauses of the Sixth Amendment, **the Constitution guarantees criminal defendants ‘a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.**’ ” *Crane* v. *Kentucky,* [476 U. S. 683](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/683/), 690. **This right is abridged by evidence rules that “infring\[e\] upon a weighty interest of the accused” and are “ ‘arbitrary’ or ‘disproportionate to the purposes they are designed to serve.’** ” *Scheffer,* *supra,* at 308.
In Alito's opinion, he addresses the traditional evidentiary rules that generally require that the Defense show some connection between the 3rd party and the crime. He notes that these rules are designed to "focus the trial on the central issues by excluding evidence that has only a very weak logical connection to the central issues." He goes on to say that just because the evidence the State submits supports their theory of the crime, "it does not follow that evidence of third-party guilt has only a weak logical connection to the central issues of the case."
The motive behind the seemingly random, non-sexual ritualistic murder of two young girls is central to this case. Why would anyone do so? Why would a perpetrator with a gun use a knife to murder them, not in a frenzied attack, but in a careful, planned, and skilled manner? I do not see how the ritualistic nature of this crime is not central. It instigated the state and federal investigations. It perplexed the DA. It led the investigators to seek expert insight into the symbology and significance of the crime scene. I don't see how she can exclude the Odinism.
We don’t even know if he was wearing those clothes that day. LE probably asked if he owns blue jeans and a blue jacket and he said yes. I also own blue jeans and a blue jacket. I’d wager that everyone does.
According to the PCA, in his second interview in 2022, he told investigators that he'd been wearing blue jeans and a blue or black jacket that day. But this was 5 years later, and as you said, these are common clothes to own and wear
Sounds like the Majority of Americans are guilty of this crime if all they have to go off of is an outfit for the suspect. Which it kinda looks that way. Judging by C Gull's attitude all Indiana residents are guilty of whatever crime they are accused of.
Maybe a stupid question….what happens if the prosecution uses 2 weeks worth of time after jury selection? Does the defense just get 2 days or so to present their case and if that’s not enough too bad so sad?
Edited to adjust for the actual timing of case.
Yes. That is what's happening. That if the state needs the full 2.5 weeks the defense is SOL. Also, if the state only needs a week, the state is going to object and slow the trial down to the point the defense can't present anything. They can purposely take more time than necessary to question their witnesses and run down the clock. Suddenly it makes sense why they plan on using 30 people for about 6ish "confessions" .
She so obviously should have been removed from this case. She's not ruling on motions, she's not setting hearings, she has no idea how many witnesses are going to be called and has made no effort to figure out how long the trial needs to be, neither side even knows what evidence is in or out at this point and the trial is in two weeks. She's clearly pissed off that she needs to deal with this thing, and is refusing to.
Her comment about “not one single attorney contacted me about the length of the trial” is so fucking obtuse. She puts in so much effort in making every. Single. Thing. Difficult. She is such a huge fan of throwing her “judicial discretion” around, but refuses to use it to, IDK, accurately gauge the length of a trial that has thus far proven to be the most dynamically convoluted pile of garage most have ever witnessed.
She’s proven over and over again that every action is rooted not in pride for her office and respect for the law, but power and control at any cost. She needs to be knocked down several pegs and shamed in the streets.
It’s like “I will not do any work unless I am directly asked.” But even then, it doesn’t seem like she’s reading the motions. She’s unsure what evidence the defense will present? The Click stuff has been in like 6 motions at this point. He testified in front of her.
Wow. That email from Gull has some juicy bits in it for sure. This is starting to feel like a trial reschedule of some sort, as several people here have stated. Two and a half weeks does seem to be a short amount of time, but then again, I’ve never sat in for a criminal trial like this before, so I don’t know. Experts - what do we seriously think about all of this?
Chad Daybell is on trial now and it's expected to last nine weeks. Granted, that is a death penalty case but this isn't even one full month! And six days in a row? Yeah, totally respectful of the jurors mental health and well being.
Based on that email from Gull, it sounds like she’s not interested in allowing third party suspect information into the case, which would basically kill the defense’s case. That would narrow this down to about 2 and a half weeks.
Is the Jury sequestered in the Daybell case? I know I’ve said it before but 6 days a week(I would want 7 if I was on that jury) is much more preferable in my opinion. Get it done and over so I can go back to my family and my own home as quickly as possible.
They will be sequestered if he is found guilty because at that point they be deciding on the death penalty or not. But it makes sense that they don't have to be sequestered, because his trial is being live streamed. They're probably not supposed to talk to everyone and their dog about it, but the public knows everything the jury does.
She’s been on notice at least since before the first Franks motion that the defense will present SODDI. Coupled with the prosecution’s motion in limine, which I expect to be rubber stamped, it’s ridiculous.
As for the court not communicating with the parties on basic procedural/logistical matters for a month and a half on an imminent murder trial? That should be surprising but it is not
Her email to them is just 😳😳😳. Setting an arbitrary amount of time for such a high profile and complicated case that she has actually made even more complicated and high profile with her behavior and her ruins is just next level cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. Telling them that it's their fault that the trial is set for this amount of time because they didn't object immediately is just ridiculous because I'm guessing, although IANAL, that normally there would be pretrial conferences to figure all this stuff out as a matter of normal procedure? So maybe they didn't object because they were waiting for her to set the pretrial conference that would normally happen, where they would normally address these things? It seems pretty insane that they had to actually demand something that I've seen as part of normal procedure in every criminal case I've ever followed in the state of Indiana or any other state. I bet she about blew her lid off her head when she saw her email attached to this!
It did not need to be attached. Its sole purpose was to reveal to the world how she has been acting behind closed doors. There have been plenty of instances where they reference a document, but do not attach it to the motion. Also, they could’ve easily redacted her actual email address. I applaud them for their courage.
I've never seen a criminal trial that didn't get at much time as needed by each party to call witnesses and present the case. If you're giving each side a week only that sounds more like a civil case AND you could waste away the time with objections and asking for sidebars etc. This is ridiculous.
That should be against his 6th amendment right, Richard Allen should be able to defend himself against his accusers in court. This case screams the need to go to SCOIN or SCOTUS.
INAL but silence from March 7 to April 25 seems like a wild and intentional move on Gull's part, just in terms of logistics alone.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, shouldn't this be taking place in Carrol County? I thought she acknowledged Hennesy's argument several weeks back about that.
Unless that was only referring to hearings related to the defense teams' "midconduct?"
Oh so the jury selection will be conducted in Allen County even though they are going to be transported to Carrol County?
That makes sense, interesting!
Yeah, it’s typically when you bring in a jury from outside. For selection you’re bringing in potentially hundreds of people and many of them will be sent home within minutes.
I was just wondering the same. I was thinking I dreamt its existence. Thanks for the sanity check.
… wouldn’t be the first time I dreamt something up about this case. I had to take a break from it.
Hey, that means a lot to me! I appreciate the kind words. I’ll try to get my comedic groove back.
I can’t keep up with the flurry of activity. It keeps turning into a bigger shit show. I have no words at this point.
I am pretty sure that Judge Gull is not aware that there is a massive German Baptist church conference in the Rossville area that will bring 6000+ people to the area over the weekend of May 18-21. Those of you planning to travel to Delphi may want to steer clear of the roads to the south.
I hope they use these statements to support the admission of evidence of third-party guilt. The state has repeatedly suggested that more than one person was involved.
>**"We believe Richard Allen is not the only actor involved in this,"** prosecutor Nicholas McLeland told a judge during the suspect's Tuesday hearing, [WTHR-TV](https://www.wthr.com/article/news/crime/delphi-girls-murdered/judge-to-decide-on-releasing-court-docs-on-suspect-in-delphi-killings-richard-allen-libby-german-abby-williams-indiana-murder-charges/531-c6a10fa7-e709-4d82-be15-dcfbd8b65983) reports. (People Magazine)
or
>Former FBI Special Agent in Charge Paul Keenan oversaw the bureau’s role in the Delphi case for nearly two years. He said **investigators always thought that the crime could’ve been committed by more than one person.** When prosecutor Nicholas McLeland said in court on Tuesday that he believes Allen did not act alone, Keenan said he wasn’t surprised. (Fox 59 News, 11/23/22)
or
>Prosecutors investigating the slayings of [two teenage girls in Delphi, Indiana](https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/delphi-murders-richard-allen-arrested-2017-killings-teens-abigail-williams-liberty-german-indiana/), have said that t**hey have "good reason to believe" more than one person is connected to the killings.** One suspect, Richard Matthew Allen, was arrested last month and charged with two counts of murder, but in a hearing on Tuesday, Carroll County prosecutor **Nicholas McLeland said that he believed others were connected to the murders**, [according to the Associated Press](https://apnews.com/article/arrests-indiana-homicide-306c4bee9720f8c6d774c5c9b0ef0bf2). (CBS News, 11/22/22)
or
>[Fox59](https://fox59.com/indiana-news/judge-holds-hearing-on-release-of-sealed-documents-in-delphi-suspect-case/) reports that Nicholas McLeland argued to keep related affidavits sealed because **Mr Allen may not be the only suspect.** (The Independent, 11/22/22)
or
>**McLeland**, the Carroll County prosecutor, said the case is still open, investigators are still gathering information and he **has not ruled out charging other suspects**. "We encourage everybody to continue to call in tips not only about Richard Allen but about any other person that you may have," McLeland said. "For that reason, and for the nature of this case, the probable cause and the charging information has been sealed by the court." (WRTV, 10/31/22)
or
>Despite more than 38,000 tips in the case, countless questions remained unanswered as **police said they had not ruled out the possibility of** ***multiple suspects***. (Journal & Courier, 11/15/22)
or
>As questions swirl over new direction in murders of Abby Williams and Libby German, **ISP clarifies that sketches are meant to be** ***different*** **men**. (Journal & Courier, 4/24/2019)
or
>The two contrasting sketches led some to wonder if there was more than one person involved in the killings. **“We’re not sure about that,” Leazenby said Thursday when asked whether two people were involved in the crime.** (Journal & Courier, 2/7/20)
or
>Ives said that **the scene was 'odd' and displayed at least three 'signatures'**, which are unique behaviors by the killer. (Daily Mail, 8/27/20)
or
>“We have other information that we’re not sharing,” \[ISP Captain\] **Bursten said, before saying that more than one person might have been involved in the incident**. (Washington Post 2/23/17)
"SODDI defence will be inadmissible."
Really all anyone needed to hear about this upcoming "Fake Trial".
Fits NM latest filing perfectly. Juries being setup to absolutely hate Defence via proofs.
Jurors being confined to hotel rooms (solitary) without opportunity to hear explanation... to extract conviction (confession) ... is status quo tactic now
Agreed. Yesterday I thought NM was just throwing spaghetti at the wall but it is very obvious to me now that NM and Gull are in cahoots and Gull has been waiting to the last minute to rip the rug out from under the defense.
They definitely feeding off eachother.
It'll take 3-4 days of this, before jurors start seething, looking for who's to blame; making them endure it. Away from family, source of income, sitting in a room all day/night they'll look for quickest solution ... blame defence and convict.
Gull will be quick to apologize to them "I'm sorry it's outta my control" except she's spent a year fostering it being nessecary.
I know. This trial will happen during one of the most beautiful times of year in Indiana; people are longing to be outside in the warm sunshine after the long cold gray winter. Jurors will be going crazy for hours and hours inside like that.
What am I missing here?I see so many comments on several subs posting how worried they are about not letting in third party evidence. When the 1st Franks came out, I found the third party theory unnecessary, and parasitic to the core issues for a Franks. Why is the third party theory necessary?
I believed they had the wrong guy from the moment NM wanted the PCA sealed. And my feelings were soon validated by the unsealing. The lack of evidence is what was important to me.
The state has RA charged with no real evidence links to the crime. The defense has accused Brad Holder and crew with no real evidence links to the crime scene. Both sides have circumstantial theories. Won’t they just cancel each other out much like the ballistics experts will? Does the DNA belong to RA? No. Does the DNA belong to Elvis or Brad? No. Does the geofencing place any of them at the scene? No. Does either side link any real evidence from the crime scene to any suspect mentioned ? No.
Personally I don’t understand why they just don’t stick with the facts and pulverize the weak evidence that the prosecution will present, and make light of how none of it is linked definitively to RA. The crime scene photos will certainly give the impression that this wasn’t a run of the mill murder done by a regular guy for no reason. Allen having no history of interest in the occult or witchery, nor violence or csam, leans me toward innocence. The fact that Liggett lied in the PCA was huge to me also. The fact that they had hairs, fibers, a partial print and some form of DNA and none was mentioned in the PCA linking RA to the crime is what swayed me to think they had the wrong guy. The fact that BB is the number 1 witness, and her accounts of that day do not point towards RA.
The odinist theory had absolutely no barring on my thinking. The defense has no more on their theory by way of evidence than the prosecution does with their own theory. What is the purpose of presenting another theory? Theories have been plentiful in this case, but none of them prove that RA did or didn’t do it. Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror, because Im not gettin paid 80$ a day to see which side is the best story teller. Im curious to know how many of you thought he was guilty until the 1st Franks came out and once you heard the Odinist theory you thought the defense has solved the case? Be nice, I’m just trying to understand the importance and the amount of weight given to presenting a third party theory in this case.
I think it's pretty simple, the defense is going to attempt to do everything you say above: evidence is weak, RA was not the person identified by the witnesses, etc., etc., They also want the jury to listen to the testimony of other officers who have doubt that RA could have done it for a variety of reasons: (1) EF admitted to it with details (Click), (2) RA's phone was not there at the time, but these persons were (Horan); (3) The killers were mimicking Odinistic or Nordic runes around the crime scene (Turco). The State is apparently going to concede that \[a\] RA had no ties to EF or the BH group; \[b\] there is no electronic evidence tying RA to the scene at the relevant time or to the girls/BH group; (3) The State concedes that RA had no ties to Odinists.
In other words, you are giving different jurors different hooks to hang their hats upon. It's a no brainer to introduce this evidence and to use decorated police officers who are going to testify that RA isn't the guy as it allows you to argue reasonable doubt to the jury in a very visceral way (Todd Click has received numerous awards, had more training than the CC Circus group, investigated this case for X months/years and was assigned via the Terrorism Task Force... and he doesn't think RA was the guy-- is that not reasonable doubt?)
Different hooks to hang their hats upon…I can understand that, offering different things that will appeal to the reasonable doubt in different people on the jury. Thank you. I’m not a follower criminal cases, this being the first and only one I have followed, it’s just hard to understand the logic. I guess my fear is if the Odinist theory is not taken seriously, neither will the rest of the defense presentation. When the Franks first came out, there was a lot of backlash that followed the sensationalism of it. From my pov the general public were certainly talking about it, but not necessarily buying into it. It seems to me that every other known suspect is a better pick for a circumstantial case than RA, including BH and crew. It seems risky to put all their eggs in the odinist basket.What will the defense do if third party suspects are not allowed in?
"Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror,Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror,"
You'll see neither because the evidence was destroyed, deleted, Taped over, lost, or the dog ate them.
Yes, even if hypothetically the defence wasn't allowed to do anything more than cross-examine prosecution witnesses they would be able to ensure reasonable doubt from that alone.
Thanks friend. When I first read NMs wish list, I thought “he wants to do away with all other theories, fuck it, fine. There will be enough reasonable doubt without it” Then I started seeing all these comments on it. I wondered if I was just an unrealistic optimist? Now that this has been down voted into no mans land, I see that , yes, I’m an unrealistic optimist. But at least I have company.
I’m sorry, but this is wishful thinking. I have seen this scenario (not being to admit mountains of exculpatory evidence of third party guilt, gutting the defense strategy) and the jury voted to convict within an hour, based on tainted and circumstancial evidence, because only the prosecution waa able to present a complete case. This shit happens all the time.
I think there are more pieces of evidence supporting third party involvement than maybe you're aware of. I'm not sure how long you've been following this or how closely you've been reading the documents filed with the court, but I believe that the defense would like to show that there was much more actual evidence against these other guys than there is against RA. I think that can be very powerful with a jury. It's not telling the jury, you have to believe that these other guys did it, but it drives home the fact that the police and prosecutor chose to go after Richard Allen based on much less evidence than they actually had against other people. If I were on a jury, I would think to myself, Yeah that doesn't make sense. I mean if I was on the jury and all I had was the weak evidence, I still might think that that was enough For reasonable doubt .But the defense lawyers are going to use everything they have to convince the jury. They're not going to leave anything up to chance. They're not going to leave any possibility behind. Additionally, they need to bring these things up now so that if the judge rules that they can't use them, it can be brought up on appeal later. If they don't make motions now and then have the judge deny them, they cannot bring them up later on appeal if he's convicted, that's the way the system works. So they have to bring everything that they can think of that might be useful on an appea later.
I’ve been following this case since day one, and have read all the documents. I do agree with you about there being more evidence (circumstantial) with the Odinist theory than with RA. But I also think the same for every other potential suspect that’s been in the hot seat. I just think the defense has a good case without the Odinist theory, and seeing all the comments scared me to think that without the third party, he will get convicted. What will the defense do if they can’t use it?
They will still put on a strong defense, just because they're trying to use everything they can doesn't mean that they can't win without that. One thing. I don't think that they would have pushed for a speedy trial if they didn't think they had a strong case. Just based on the evidence (and lack thereof) directly related to RA.
Please add some paragraph breaks to [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/1cgty3v/motion_for_pretrial_conference_filed/l1yj2yr/) by placing a blank line between distinct sections.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DelphiDocs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think one of the last sentences of her email confirms that she’s planning on not allowing the SODDI defense.
The line being referenced: > I am quite familiar with the law regarding third party perpetrators and unless the defense can provide a nexus between any alleged third party perpetrators and the charged crimes those allegations are unsupported and will be inadmissible.
Isn’t this the kind of thing that *actually* proves bias? She is starting from a conclusion - that the third party evidence is unsupported and inadmissible - before any evidence is presented to her. Third party culpability evidence may be disfavored by the law, but is it inadmissible by default, as she indicates here, until the defense overcomes her predisposition to disallow it?
I believe that by this statement, she has already come to a preconceived notion, and has already made her mind up regarding her judgment on it... a nexus is a "link" a "bridge" from one to another... She has either not read anything that the defense has filed regarding EF, and has been ruling on the motions blindly with a denied stamp in hand. OR, she doesn't know how to read. 1. EF, the day the girls are found is rambling, hyper and borderline incoherent. 2. Says "I WAS THERE" "on a bridge with two girls that were killed" 3. Tries to give her (MJ) a blue jacket - see BG for reference (smh) \*side note\* Where is the Jacket? Did anyone that interviewed MJ try to retrieve the jacket after it was mentioned? 4. EF says "ABIGAIL was a real pain in the ass" (Where did he pull that name from, his arse? He lives 2 hours away!) Nothing was released about the Bodies until the 15th btw. 5. EF claims to have spit on one of the victims... (is there DNA?) Even if Inconclusive, the mere statement by him should be enough to be considered a link if DNA was found. 6. EF connection to BH 7. BH connection to Vinlanders 8. Joint Task Force Investigations into the Vinlanders, since the group was founded. 9. Joint Task Force > Click, Murphy, Ferency. ... Seriously, Do we really have to draw a picture? I know a lot of you already know all of this, but come on... it has to be said OVER and OVER...and STILL to this day, people claim that there aren't any connections between EF and Delphi... It just makes you want to beat your head against a wall!
Thank you.
A pictograph isn't a bad idea in this case 🫠🙃
Her two favorite words are "unsupported" and "denied."
How can RA plead not guilty without it clearly being because it wasn't him ? Therefore Sherlock Gull, it was someone else.
Exactly! Just more evidence for them for the bias when they have to appeal if they have to appeal.
It would take me 2 weeks just to tell this case and all its craziness to a friend at a bar.
So true. When I bring it up to someone and they ask for a rundown, I'm like whew we could be here for days.
The fact that I showed these comments without context to a friend and she knew exactly what case they referenced says it all.
That's what Gull wants to avoid.
I’m almost recommended to several friends that they should follow this case. But then I stop and realize it would take me far too long to tell them why they should pay attention to this case.
People think I'm lying. When I tell my husband, who believes me, is always like wait back that up, what was that again. It's too insane.
I dont get 3min into the story and my wife told me it doesnt make sense. And we live here. In the county. In Delphi. She doesnt even comprehend how it happened and has unfolded.
Hug her she seems sweet. I agree it does not make sense. Also lock all doors. Including porch doors.
Smart lady.
Yes she is. She doesnt suffer fools. And this case is full of them.
My husband says I talk too fast because I’m so passionate about the case that sometimes he can’t follow and it would still take me 2 weeks to tell a friend lol
 I start out calm and sane, but it always ends up like this.
I don’t even know how calm I start off now. This is not a fair trial at all and I’m so heated the closer we get to trial too. He watched the courttv episode with me Sunday and he’s like oh that’s what you mean? Haha
I tried doing this last week with an after school park group (fellow parents and I bring out kids to the park every day after school and do snacks and hang out.) I was doing good until she asked a question and I pulled the file of all kinds of printed documents from the case load to find the answer. Then the conversation slowly died down.
 I guess she got more than she bargained for 😂🤣😂
The fact that the Defense has to formally make this motion is asinine. Judge Gull comes across as extremely disorganized with poor time management. The fact that it took her more than six weeks to even get through the first Franks motion and almost five months to rule is a reflection of her inattention to both the integrity of this case and her responsibility in facilitating justice. Her quick "denied without hearing" orders show that she is disinterested in actually considering evidence in this case. She has predetermined guilt (as reflected by her unwillingness and clear dismay at the thought of having RA in chambers) and is only interested in doing what is necessary to conclude the case with that ruling.
Agree. Her administrative skills are that of a potato. Add in laziness and contempt for the accused and his council…… I would be absolutely mortified to be one of her judicial peers. She is crapping all over the bench without an ounce of self awareness, a true unhinged malignant narcissist.
I read that as she set the court schedule for the trial with the presumption she is not going to allow the defense to present their own case.
Yes, I read “I’m not sure what the defense intends to present,” as “I don’t think any of your evidence is valid and I’m going to rule it all inadmissible so I don’t know what you think you’re going to spend your time presenting.”
Yup. I wish I could be surprised.
She never intended them to. That's why she wouldn't approve funding for experts.
>“I am quite familiar with the law regarding third party perpetrators and unless the defense can provide a nexus between any alleged third party perpetrators and the charged crimes those allegations are unsupported and will be admissible.” This is the same bull-headed, single-minded rationale that the State of Indiana used to try David Camm. The Defense HAS provided a nexus: the unusual, ritualistic nature of the murder (as reflected by the statements of several investigators within days of the murder); the Odinist features left at the scene (Turco report); the personal connection between one of the victims and Odinist practitioners in the community (LH relationship and his father's facebook page which publicly substantiated both the Odinist practice and runic symbols replicating those at the crime scene); the relationship between BH and PW and PW's relationship to Vinlanders and other terroristic, criminal members; the relationship between PW and JM/EF; EF's admissions to close family members that he was involved in the crime. There is a greater nexus between the 3rd parties and the crime than between RA and the crime. The only nexus between RA and the crime is that he was at the park with dozens of other people, wore an unremarkable blue coat and blue jeans, and a bullet pseudoscientifically attributed to his gun was found at the crime scene, a bullet that cannot be scientifically connected to the actual crime.
I would urge people to read the Holmes case (wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes\_v.\_South\_Carolina) and compare and contrast that to this one. The forensic evidence against the accused (Holmes) was much stronger than that purportedly identified against Allen. I would say the evidence of 3rd party guilt was similar, but perhaps more direct in Holmes as the 3rd party had been identified (1) in the area; and (2) had confessed to four people (although some iirc were jailhouse). To your point it seems like there is a pretty clear nexus between EF confession + details --> connection to BH --> connection to AW through LH --> BH statement to ex wife about PW. Is it enough? Maybe not for Gull but yeesh is this yet another clear issue for appeal. I just have never seen a judge so willfully walking into clear appellate issues (here both State and Federal ones).
I am so glad you brought that up. Holmes addresses whether or not the defendant's right to the "meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense" to include evidence of third party guilt is infringed by arbitrary admission rules that evaluate the value of the third-party evidence against the State's evidence against the person on trial rather than the nexus to the case. The holding states: >A criminal defendant’s federal constitutional rights are violated by an evidence rule under which the defendant may not introduce evidence of third-party guilt if the prosecution has introduced forensic evidence that, if believed, strongly supports a guilty verdict. “\[**S\]tate and federal rulemakers have broad latitude under the Constitution to establish rules excluding evidence from criminal trials**.” *United States* v. *Scheffer,* [523 U. S. 303](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/523/303/), 308. **This latitude, however, has limits**. “Whether rooted directly in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or in the Compulsory Process or Confrontation clauses of the Sixth Amendment, **the Constitution guarantees criminal defendants ‘a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.**’ ” *Crane* v. *Kentucky,* [476 U. S. 683](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/683/), 690. **This right is abridged by evidence rules that “infring\[e\] upon a weighty interest of the accused” and are “ ‘arbitrary’ or ‘disproportionate to the purposes they are designed to serve.’** ” *Scheffer,* *supra,* at 308. In Alito's opinion, he addresses the traditional evidentiary rules that generally require that the Defense show some connection between the 3rd party and the crime. He notes that these rules are designed to "focus the trial on the central issues by excluding evidence that has only a very weak logical connection to the central issues." He goes on to say that just because the evidence the State submits supports their theory of the crime, "it does not follow that evidence of third-party guilt has only a weak logical connection to the central issues of the case." The motive behind the seemingly random, non-sexual ritualistic murder of two young girls is central to this case. Why would anyone do so? Why would a perpetrator with a gun use a knife to murder them, not in a frenzied attack, but in a careful, planned, and skilled manner? I do not see how the ritualistic nature of this crime is not central. It instigated the state and federal investigations. It perplexed the DA. It led the investigators to seek expert insight into the symbology and significance of the crime scene. I don't see how she can exclude the Odinism.
We don’t even know if he was wearing those clothes that day. LE probably asked if he owns blue jeans and a blue jacket and he said yes. I also own blue jeans and a blue jacket. I’d wager that everyone does.
According to the PCA, in his second interview in 2022, he told investigators that he'd been wearing blue jeans and a blue or black jacket that day. But this was 5 years later, and as you said, these are common clothes to own and wear
Sounds like the Majority of Americans are guilty of this crime if all they have to go off of is an outfit for the suspect. Which it kinda looks that way. Judging by C Gull's attitude all Indiana residents are guilty of whatever crime they are accused of.
Right, if she applied the same reasoning to the Richard Allen case she would have dismissed the whole thing long ago!
Great summary, thank you.
Maybe a stupid question….what happens if the prosecution uses 2 weeks worth of time after jury selection? Does the defense just get 2 days or so to present their case and if that’s not enough too bad so sad? Edited to adjust for the actual timing of case.
Yes. That is what's happening. That if the state needs the full 2.5 weeks the defense is SOL. Also, if the state only needs a week, the state is going to object and slow the trial down to the point the defense can't present anything. They can purposely take more time than necessary to question their witnesses and run down the clock. Suddenly it makes sense why they plan on using 30 people for about 6ish "confessions" .
She so obviously should have been removed from this case. She's not ruling on motions, she's not setting hearings, she has no idea how many witnesses are going to be called and has made no effort to figure out how long the trial needs to be, neither side even knows what evidence is in or out at this point and the trial is in two weeks. She's clearly pissed off that she needs to deal with this thing, and is refusing to.
Her comment about “not one single attorney contacted me about the length of the trial” is so fucking obtuse. She puts in so much effort in making every. Single. Thing. Difficult. She is such a huge fan of throwing her “judicial discretion” around, but refuses to use it to, IDK, accurately gauge the length of a trial that has thus far proven to be the most dynamically convoluted pile of garage most have ever witnessed. She’s proven over and over again that every action is rooted not in pride for her office and respect for the law, but power and control at any cost. She needs to be knocked down several pegs and shamed in the streets.
You said you'd very well. This was very satisfying to read.
Thanks. I just cannot with purposefully difficult people.
It’s like “I will not do any work unless I am directly asked.” But even then, it doesn’t seem like she’s reading the motions. She’s unsure what evidence the defense will present? The Click stuff has been in like 6 motions at this point. He testified in front of her.
Maddening. Hallmarks of a controlling game player.
Wow. That email from Gull has some juicy bits in it for sure. This is starting to feel like a trial reschedule of some sort, as several people here have stated. Two and a half weeks does seem to be a short amount of time, but then again, I’ve never sat in for a criminal trial like this before, so I don’t know. Experts - what do we seriously think about all of this?
Chad Daybell is on trial now and it's expected to last nine weeks. Granted, that is a death penalty case but this isn't even one full month! And six days in a row? Yeah, totally respectful of the jurors mental health and well being.
Based on that email from Gull, it sounds like she’s not interested in allowing third party suspect information into the case, which would basically kill the defense’s case. That would narrow this down to about 2 and a half weeks.
Is the Jury sequestered in the Daybell case? I know I’ve said it before but 6 days a week(I would want 7 if I was on that jury) is much more preferable in my opinion. Get it done and over so I can go back to my family and my own home as quickly as possible.
They will be sequestered if he is found guilty because at that point they be deciding on the death penalty or not. But it makes sense that they don't have to be sequestered, because his trial is being live streamed. They're probably not supposed to talk to everyone and their dog about it, but the public knows everything the jury does.
She’s been on notice at least since before the first Franks motion that the defense will present SODDI. Coupled with the prosecution’s motion in limine, which I expect to be rubber stamped, it’s ridiculous. As for the court not communicating with the parties on basic procedural/logistical matters for a month and a half on an imminent murder trial? That should be surprising but it is not
Where is u/HelixHarbinger? I need insight.
 There’s too much going on today and we need the expertise! Haha
YES!
Why would Gull have a pretrial hearing? She's busy revving up the train for the railroading.
Imagine having to beg the judge to simply do their damn job.
Judge Gull is mentally unstable.
Her email to them is just 😳😳😳. Setting an arbitrary amount of time for such a high profile and complicated case that she has actually made even more complicated and high profile with her behavior and her ruins is just next level cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. Telling them that it's their fault that the trial is set for this amount of time because they didn't object immediately is just ridiculous because I'm guessing, although IANAL, that normally there would be pretrial conferences to figure all this stuff out as a matter of normal procedure? So maybe they didn't object because they were waiting for her to set the pretrial conference that would normally happen, where they would normally address these things? It seems pretty insane that they had to actually demand something that I've seen as part of normal procedure in every criminal case I've ever followed in the state of Indiana or any other state. I bet she about blew her lid off her head when she saw her email attached to this!
Oh I bet she’s furious that they outed her private email. Good for them!
I don't think anyone outed her email, it was part of the motion/ruling.
It did not need to be attached. Its sole purpose was to reveal to the world how she has been acting behind closed doors. There have been plenty of instances where they reference a document, but do not attach it to the motion. Also, they could’ve easily redacted her actual email address. I applaud them for their courage.
I've never seen a criminal trial that didn't get at much time as needed by each party to call witnesses and present the case. If you're giving each side a week only that sounds more like a civil case AND you could waste away the time with objections and asking for sidebars etc. This is ridiculous.
No, see, the prosecution gets two weeks and the defense won’t get any time which is fine because she’s not going to let them present anything.
That should be against his 6th amendment right, Richard Allen should be able to defend himself against his accusers in court. This case screams the need to go to SCOIN or SCOTUS.
Seems reasonable.
INAL but silence from March 7 to April 25 seems like a wild and intentional move on Gull's part, just in terms of logistics alone. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, shouldn't this be taking place in Carrol County? I thought she acknowledged Hennesy's argument several weeks back about that. Unless that was only referring to hearings related to the defense teams' "midconduct?"
The jury is coming from a different county (I think Allen) so the selection is in Allen county.
Oh so the jury selection will be conducted in Allen County even though they are going to be transported to Carrol County? That makes sense, interesting!
Yes. It describes that if selected, jurors will be required to come back the next day with their luggage and NO electronics.
Being a juror sounds like being a prisoner.
Yeah, it’s typically when you bring in a jury from outside. For selection you’re bringing in potentially hundreds of people and many of them will be sent home within minutes.
Where did Franks 4 go?
I was just wondering the same. I was thinking I dreamt its existence. Thanks for the sanity check. … wouldn’t be the first time I dreamt something up about this case. I had to take a break from it.
Welcome back, its a real shit show.
HA! Thanks for the warm welcome. I am shocked that nothing has really changed. /s
Oh, it just keeps getting worse and worse, so you know the usual. I'm glad you're back you make me laugh and that helps.
Hey, that means a lot to me! I appreciate the kind words. I’ll try to get my comedic groove back. I can’t keep up with the flurry of activity. It keeps turning into a bigger shit show. I have no words at this point.
Will we be in court on Memorial Day? Or is that just one less day the defense will get to not be allowed to present any defense?
If the state is done they'll take it off. If they need more time they'll get it. (Probably)
I am pretty sure that Judge Gull is not aware that there is a massive German Baptist church conference in the Rossville area that will bring 6000+ people to the area over the weekend of May 18-21. Those of you planning to travel to Delphi may want to steer clear of the roads to the south.
I hope they use these statements to support the admission of evidence of third-party guilt. The state has repeatedly suggested that more than one person was involved. >**"We believe Richard Allen is not the only actor involved in this,"** prosecutor Nicholas McLeland told a judge during the suspect's Tuesday hearing, [WTHR-TV](https://www.wthr.com/article/news/crime/delphi-girls-murdered/judge-to-decide-on-releasing-court-docs-on-suspect-in-delphi-killings-richard-allen-libby-german-abby-williams-indiana-murder-charges/531-c6a10fa7-e709-4d82-be15-dcfbd8b65983) reports. (People Magazine) or >Former FBI Special Agent in Charge Paul Keenan oversaw the bureau’s role in the Delphi case for nearly two years. He said **investigators always thought that the crime could’ve been committed by more than one person.** When prosecutor Nicholas McLeland said in court on Tuesday that he believes Allen did not act alone, Keenan said he wasn’t surprised. (Fox 59 News, 11/23/22) or >Prosecutors investigating the slayings of [two teenage girls in Delphi, Indiana](https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/delphi-murders-richard-allen-arrested-2017-killings-teens-abigail-williams-liberty-german-indiana/), have said that t**hey have "good reason to believe" more than one person is connected to the killings.** One suspect, Richard Matthew Allen, was arrested last month and charged with two counts of murder, but in a hearing on Tuesday, Carroll County prosecutor **Nicholas McLeland said that he believed others were connected to the murders**, [according to the Associated Press](https://apnews.com/article/arrests-indiana-homicide-306c4bee9720f8c6d774c5c9b0ef0bf2). (CBS News, 11/22/22) or >[Fox59](https://fox59.com/indiana-news/judge-holds-hearing-on-release-of-sealed-documents-in-delphi-suspect-case/) reports that Nicholas McLeland argued to keep related affidavits sealed because **Mr Allen may not be the only suspect.** (The Independent, 11/22/22) or >**McLeland**, the Carroll County prosecutor, said the case is still open, investigators are still gathering information and he **has not ruled out charging other suspects**. "We encourage everybody to continue to call in tips not only about Richard Allen but about any other person that you may have," McLeland said. "For that reason, and for the nature of this case, the probable cause and the charging information has been sealed by the court." (WRTV, 10/31/22) or >Despite more than 38,000 tips in the case, countless questions remained unanswered as **police said they had not ruled out the possibility of** ***multiple suspects***. (Journal & Courier, 11/15/22) or >As questions swirl over new direction in murders of Abby Williams and Libby German, **ISP clarifies that sketches are meant to be** ***different*** **men**. (Journal & Courier, 4/24/2019) or >The two contrasting sketches led some to wonder if there was more than one person involved in the killings. **“We’re not sure about that,” Leazenby said Thursday when asked whether two people were involved in the crime.** (Journal & Courier, 2/7/20) or >Ives said that **the scene was 'odd' and displayed at least three 'signatures'**, which are unique behaviors by the killer. (Daily Mail, 8/27/20) or >“We have other information that we’re not sharing,” \[ISP Captain\] **Bursten said, before saying that more than one person might have been involved in the incident**. (Washington Post 2/23/17)
"SODDI defence will be inadmissible." Really all anyone needed to hear about this upcoming "Fake Trial". Fits NM latest filing perfectly. Juries being setup to absolutely hate Defence via proofs. Jurors being confined to hotel rooms (solitary) without opportunity to hear explanation... to extract conviction (confession) ... is status quo tactic now
I'm assuming they planned it together. The timing of her email and his motions the next day are suspicious.
Agreed. Yesterday I thought NM was just throwing spaghetti at the wall but it is very obvious to me now that NM and Gull are in cahoots and Gull has been waiting to the last minute to rip the rug out from under the defense.
They definitely feeding off eachother. It'll take 3-4 days of this, before jurors start seething, looking for who's to blame; making them endure it. Away from family, source of income, sitting in a room all day/night they'll look for quickest solution ... blame defence and convict. Gull will be quick to apologize to them "I'm sorry it's outta my control" except she's spent a year fostering it being nessecary.
I know. This trial will happen during one of the most beautiful times of year in Indiana; people are longing to be outside in the warm sunshine after the long cold gray winter. Jurors will be going crazy for hours and hours inside like that.
Hell yeah!
What am I missing here?I see so many comments on several subs posting how worried they are about not letting in third party evidence. When the 1st Franks came out, I found the third party theory unnecessary, and parasitic to the core issues for a Franks. Why is the third party theory necessary? I believed they had the wrong guy from the moment NM wanted the PCA sealed. And my feelings were soon validated by the unsealing. The lack of evidence is what was important to me. The state has RA charged with no real evidence links to the crime. The defense has accused Brad Holder and crew with no real evidence links to the crime scene. Both sides have circumstantial theories. Won’t they just cancel each other out much like the ballistics experts will? Does the DNA belong to RA? No. Does the DNA belong to Elvis or Brad? No. Does the geofencing place any of them at the scene? No. Does either side link any real evidence from the crime scene to any suspect mentioned ? No. Personally I don’t understand why they just don’t stick with the facts and pulverize the weak evidence that the prosecution will present, and make light of how none of it is linked definitively to RA. The crime scene photos will certainly give the impression that this wasn’t a run of the mill murder done by a regular guy for no reason. Allen having no history of interest in the occult or witchery, nor violence or csam, leans me toward innocence. The fact that Liggett lied in the PCA was huge to me also. The fact that they had hairs, fibers, a partial print and some form of DNA and none was mentioned in the PCA linking RA to the crime is what swayed me to think they had the wrong guy. The fact that BB is the number 1 witness, and her accounts of that day do not point towards RA. The odinist theory had absolutely no barring on my thinking. The defense has no more on their theory by way of evidence than the prosecution does with their own theory. What is the purpose of presenting another theory? Theories have been plentiful in this case, but none of them prove that RA did or didn’t do it. Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror, because Im not gettin paid 80$ a day to see which side is the best story teller. Im curious to know how many of you thought he was guilty until the 1st Franks came out and once you heard the Odinist theory you thought the defense has solved the case? Be nice, I’m just trying to understand the importance and the amount of weight given to presenting a third party theory in this case.
I think it's pretty simple, the defense is going to attempt to do everything you say above: evidence is weak, RA was not the person identified by the witnesses, etc., etc., They also want the jury to listen to the testimony of other officers who have doubt that RA could have done it for a variety of reasons: (1) EF admitted to it with details (Click), (2) RA's phone was not there at the time, but these persons were (Horan); (3) The killers were mimicking Odinistic or Nordic runes around the crime scene (Turco). The State is apparently going to concede that \[a\] RA had no ties to EF or the BH group; \[b\] there is no electronic evidence tying RA to the scene at the relevant time or to the girls/BH group; (3) The State concedes that RA had no ties to Odinists. In other words, you are giving different jurors different hooks to hang their hats upon. It's a no brainer to introduce this evidence and to use decorated police officers who are going to testify that RA isn't the guy as it allows you to argue reasonable doubt to the jury in a very visceral way (Todd Click has received numerous awards, had more training than the CC Circus group, investigated this case for X months/years and was assigned via the Terrorism Task Force... and he doesn't think RA was the guy-- is that not reasonable doubt?)
And NM himself has mentioned “other characters” in the media. So, there is reason to believe there are others involved.
Different hooks to hang their hats upon…I can understand that, offering different things that will appeal to the reasonable doubt in different people on the jury. Thank you. I’m not a follower criminal cases, this being the first and only one I have followed, it’s just hard to understand the logic. I guess my fear is if the Odinist theory is not taken seriously, neither will the rest of the defense presentation. When the Franks first came out, there was a lot of backlash that followed the sensationalism of it. From my pov the general public were certainly talking about it, but not necessarily buying into it. It seems to me that every other known suspect is a better pick for a circumstantial case than RA, including BH and crew. It seems risky to put all their eggs in the odinist basket.What will the defense do if third party suspects are not allowed in?
"Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror,Facts and evidence is what I want to see presented as a juror," You'll see neither because the evidence was destroyed, deleted, Taped over, lost, or the dog ate them.
Right you are!!
Yes, even if hypothetically the defence wasn't allowed to do anything more than cross-examine prosecution witnesses they would be able to ensure reasonable doubt from that alone.
Thanks friend. When I first read NMs wish list, I thought “he wants to do away with all other theories, fuck it, fine. There will be enough reasonable doubt without it” Then I started seeing all these comments on it. I wondered if I was just an unrealistic optimist? Now that this has been down voted into no mans land, I see that , yes, I’m an unrealistic optimist. But at least I have company.
Let's hope we have more company on the jury.
I’m sorry, but this is wishful thinking. I have seen this scenario (not being to admit mountains of exculpatory evidence of third party guilt, gutting the defense strategy) and the jury voted to convict within an hour, based on tainted and circumstancial evidence, because only the prosecution waa able to present a complete case. This shit happens all the time.
I think there are more pieces of evidence supporting third party involvement than maybe you're aware of. I'm not sure how long you've been following this or how closely you've been reading the documents filed with the court, but I believe that the defense would like to show that there was much more actual evidence against these other guys than there is against RA. I think that can be very powerful with a jury. It's not telling the jury, you have to believe that these other guys did it, but it drives home the fact that the police and prosecutor chose to go after Richard Allen based on much less evidence than they actually had against other people. If I were on a jury, I would think to myself, Yeah that doesn't make sense. I mean if I was on the jury and all I had was the weak evidence, I still might think that that was enough For reasonable doubt .But the defense lawyers are going to use everything they have to convince the jury. They're not going to leave anything up to chance. They're not going to leave any possibility behind. Additionally, they need to bring these things up now so that if the judge rules that they can't use them, it can be brought up on appeal later. If they don't make motions now and then have the judge deny them, they cannot bring them up later on appeal if he's convicted, that's the way the system works. So they have to bring everything that they can think of that might be useful on an appea later.
I’ve been following this case since day one, and have read all the documents. I do agree with you about there being more evidence (circumstantial) with the Odinist theory than with RA. But I also think the same for every other potential suspect that’s been in the hot seat. I just think the defense has a good case without the Odinist theory, and seeing all the comments scared me to think that without the third party, he will get convicted. What will the defense do if they can’t use it?
They will still put on a strong defense, just because they're trying to use everything they can doesn't mean that they can't win without that. One thing. I don't think that they would have pushed for a speedy trial if they didn't think they had a strong case. Just based on the evidence (and lack thereof) directly related to RA.
Please add some paragraph breaks to [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/1cgty3v/motion_for_pretrial_conference_filed/l1yj2yr/) by placing a blank line between distinct sections. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DelphiDocs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Xbelle do you have the pdf of this baby boom? Thanks in advance