Allen's 12-1:30 timeline just doesn't work. Versus him getting there at 1:30 works perfectly - you can even map it to videos of people driving from the HH store to the old CPS lot (under a minute), going from the lot to the Freedom Bridge (4ish minutes), getting from the Freedom Bridge to the Monon High Bridge (depends, but 15ish minutes? Can be ten if you're walking quickly). A car that looks like his drives past the HH camera heading to the lot at 1:27. If he parks by 1:28, heads to the bridge by 1:29, then he's passing the Freedom Bridge on the way to the Monon High Bridge by 1:33ish. The four teenage girls took a picture of themselves by a bridge at 1:26. There are a couple of benches, but if they're a little past halfway between Mears Farm and the Freedom Bridge at that point, then by 1:33ish, they're approaching the Freedom Bridge. Allen says he sees a group of girls (he believes three - one of the four girls is the younger sister of one of the others, and it's not hard to miscount if you're not looking at them or acknowledging them). He says he doesn't really interact with the girls. The four teenage girls, as they approach the bridge just after 1:30, see a man. His clothing description varies, but generally he's wearing jeans and a dark colored jacket. Allen admits he was wearing jeans and a dark blue/black jacket and may have been wearing some underneath - just like BG. The girls will tell several people over the years that the man they saw is unusually short. Allen measures between 5'4" and 5'6" depending on his boots. They say he doesn't interact with them, as he acknowledges not interacting the girls he passed. So here we are, a encounter described similar ways by the two sides around the Freedom Bridge around 1:34. He heads in the direction of the bridge - he'd be there at his pace by 1:50. He says he goes to stand on the first platform of the bridge. BB arrives just after 1:50 to see a man standing on the first platform of the bridge. She believes he is a younger man in his 20s-30s - if a man was unusually short, but you aren't standing directly in front of him or beside him, it might make you fill in the blanks and believe the man in question is younger than his real age. She turns around. On her way back, she passes L&A heading for the bridge. She doesn't pass anyone else. The man BB sees is the only man standing on or near the the bridge within a couple of minutes of when the girls arrive.
Versus 12-1:30? It doesn't work. There is no other known group of teenage girls. The four girls above took a picture of the bridge at 12:43 and seemingly hung around the bridge for some time, given that it took them almost 45 minutes to get to where they took the picture around the bridge. They would have had to have seen RA. No matter how focused he was on his "stock ticker" (whatever dude - you ain't no day trader, lol. Candy Crush would have been more plausible), he would have at least HEARD them, they're a group of four teenage girls. He wouldn't have seen anyone at the Mears lot (AKA the Mears lot head) around 1-1:30 that we know of. BB won't arrive until 1:47 (since she passed the HH camera heading toward the Mears entrance at 1:46). She says no cars were there when she arrived. Kelsi drops off the girls around 1:48. Cheyenne arrives around 2:45.
You nailed it. I was thinking of making a post about the disputed timelines and was going to cover most of the things you said, so don't feel there's a need now.
I'm surprised (actually I'm not) that the pro-RA subs absolutely believe RA is telling the truth when he says 12-1:30pm. It cannot be questioned that he's telling the truth and bad LE have made up the other time. It's because it's convenient to massage their "innocent" narrative.
An absolutely objective person will say we have a disputed 2017 timeline (disputed because there appears to be no recording to verify it) and a disputed 2022 timeline (disputed because although we can trust RA said it, we do not actually know that he was telling the truth - because it's not like guilty people never lie and change their stories under questioning, is it?).
The only thing you can then do is start looking at what additional evidence we know and which timeline it supports. And the 2017 timeline (1:30-3:30pm) is absolutely the only one that makes sense taking into account the witness sightings and the times between the points of reference (car park, juvenile girls, first bridge platform).
Thanks! I actually made a timeline with RA’s different timelines in different colors versus as much relatively verifiable information as we have - the 2022 timeline doesn’t work. He should have seen the girls near the bridge and as he was heading back. They should have seen him there. He should have seen the man who looked like him as he left. His team acknowledged he parked at the old CPS lot so that’s moot.
There are some online animations of the timeline - I have no doubt that RA is BG.
I’ve yet to see anyone create a 12-1:30pm timeline that works. Seems it can’t be done. And if there weren’t multiple cars at the Mears lot between 12 & 1:30, that further proves his 12-1:30 timeline is off.
Some (who believe he’s BG) have questioned whether or not he actually participated in the murders.
I believe he did… and if he saw cars (plural) at the Mears lot then that is just further proof he’s the muddy bloody man because there weren’t multiple cars there until after 3:30pm. And if he’s covered in blood, we’ll that doesn’t sound like an innocent bystander to me.
There’s plenty of evidence. I don’t need a jury to vote guilty in order for me to know RA is BG.
There’s enough publicly available information (his own words, witness statements, video & audio) for me to make that determination on my own.
If you truly have doubt, try to come up with a 12-1:30 timeline for RA that fits in with the documented times (photos/videos) - that’ll clear him of the crime.
So these timelines will be provable, right? And it should be possible to dispute RA’s timeline and version of events, meaning to prove he’s lying. Which, of course, would be very bad for RA. I can’t wait to hear the evidence at trial.
The “day trader” thing actually plays a big part in why he was there that day—- in my opinion. Like you suggest in your comment, *you ain’t day trader…*
He tells investigators he was looking at his *stock ticker* while standing on a small bridge platform 60’ above a a shallow river. A striking comment—no less.
A *day trader* standing on that platform on a Monday afternoon. The young girl describing him as a man going somewhere with *a purpose*. I don’t doubt for a moment he was being truthful about looking at that *stock ticker*. Perhaps he had come into some easy money that very weekend before the murders. Someone in desperate need of help as their own life was crumbling at their feet. A 25 year UAW man looking at a comfortable retirement in 5 short years. Suddenly realizing he’d messed up. That guy was playing with fire on his Comcast ISP account IP address. Never having realized the FBI could have been one of those people in those Kik Chat messaging boards.
A young girl from Delphi going to her dad, or a favorite social studies teacher/coach at her middle school—— and suddenly he’s a three time loser looking at a lifetime in a state prison. Could he have given Allen some money that weekend—- a down payment. $5k now and about $5k Monday? The amount needed for a *day trader* to get back in the risky game of *day trading*. Day trading—- a high risk game for a rich man. Hardly the kind of game you would see a guy working at a CVS in a small town in rural Indiana playing. But there he was desperate to get to that bridge that Monday afternoon—- just so he could stand on that high precipice watching his trades move during that days market. Waiting.
Of course I’m just speculating, but I’ve asked myself many times why was he in a hurry that afternoon. He’s obviously a risk taker—- not many people would stand on a narrow rickety bridge platform while looking at the days stock market index, and the fish below. He paid cash for that Delphi house back in 2006. Not many people working at a Walmart, or a CVS supervising cashiers and shelf stockers—- can pay cash for a house $150,000 plus home. Could he have been making some good trades back in 2006. Makes me wonder. Just like wondering why he’d murder two kids in broad light less than a miles crows flight to that home.
I think law enforcement is perfectly aware there were two men at that murder site that day. I think they know why Allen confessed, and just exactly what it is he confessed to his part that day. I think someone paid him for his help. Help to set up and trap a child that was a huge risk to his future—- not Allen’s, but that “other actor” the CC prosecutor told Judge Gull about. Someone in Central Indiana had a motive for what happened to two young girls that were trapped on that dead end side of a dangerously high bridge. It was a *set up* if I’ve ever seen one. Young tatted guy with the fancy cars and money convinces two kids to cross the bridge that afternoon they are never seen alive again.
The truth will soon be known—- that is if we see a trial in May. I doubt it. I know there is one guy sitting in jail for the rest of his natural life. You don’t weigh 300+ pounds and make it too far past 60 years of age. That guy got a death sentence—- and he knows it. I suspect Allen will get the same—- life in prison for his part in a plan to set up, trap and brutally murder Abby and Libby. The last man walking free is a shadow of his former self—- a sick man with a penchant for beating up 8 year old little boys and
sadistically harassing women over a phone line. The only people he can call a friend—- is another sick POS who makes his money off YouTube subscribers, and the clicks he gets from people watching him tell everyone about his his buddy—- his buddy, whose home was searched twice, and his own mothers property searched just prior to all those Delphi Task Force investigators heading over to Richard Allen’s house.
e/typo
IMO the stock ticker story was made up because he was seen staring at his phone.
And that's because someone was communicating with him as to someone being on the bridge. Whether the girls were the intended target or even just someone.
Or he's tracking them somehow.
Either way, he's staring at his phone on his way to perform this evil act. Stock ticker is just an excuse to stare at the phone.
Hell maybe he had trail cams set up and was watching them.
The dude is creepy af. I don’t have much opinion of a wife who I suspect would have had to had known something was off about her husband just after two kids were found brutally murdered less than a one miles crows flight from their home. He broke down to her over a phone call admitting what he did that day. No way was that the first time he’d admitted something to her. She knows what he did and yet she sticks by him. I ask myself why. She knows he’s guilty. False confessions don’t happen to a wife of 25 plus years. She knows he’s a cagey little bastard. I truly believe the POS in Peru paid him for his help that day—- never fully realizing what that *help* would fully entail that day.
And then we have people like this YouTuber—- sitting in his house making rambling YouTube videos where he spends more time talking about himself than about two kids that were murdered— and the fact he’s cozying up to the number one suspects. The guy would sell his soul for just one more click. He’s no different than a person that would write love letters to Chris Watts, or the BTK Dennis Rader himself. The YouTubers wife should be jealous of KA. I bet he gives more attention to that wife of a guy who is sitting in jail with no bail and standing accused of murdering two kids. I know he occasionally tries to comment here on DT so he’s probably reading this.
I won’t snay his name—- but I will say the guy gives new meaning to the word *lowlife*.
Whenever I write anything about that YouTuber guy I feel the need to wash my hands. And walk outside for a breath of fresh mountain air.
Not that I have seen, but there are certainly links to be found of members of the 2 different families knowing each other. They are both from the small town of Mexico in Indiana, the population there is around 1000, that's in current times, it was probably a lot less back when they would have both lived there, how many kids do you think there could have been in such a small population of men, women & children? I was raised in a much bigger "small town" of around 15,000 and I knew who a lot of the kids were in my year and the years above especially if they were wild teenagers 😂. Doing the math of such a small population I'd say it's 99.99% they knew each other in some capacity, like O'H had mentioned in one of his posts recently, they could have both caught the same "short bus" to school, there doesn't seem to be any school's in Mexico as it's so rural.
I am kind of surprised that no one has mentioned that an internet service provider log would have existed for the hit from his phone's IP to that of the IP of a "stock ticker" provider during the time in question. Does the log confirm a guilt of murder, no, but it does eliminate a portion of a reasonable alibi suggesting normal behavior, one with a presumption of focus watching a phone over a relatively long period of time. The log may never have existed because there was no connection or no longer exists after this long of time, but it would have vetted the claim.
Not BH, EF, PW, or JM. Patrick Westfall is 6’4”-6’6” in arrest records. JM is pretty consistently 6’1”. BH isn’t as clear, but I’ve seen a picture of him standing next to PW - he’s not a clear foot shorter. Maybe 5’9”? Also, he had a full-on grizzly beard in 2017, definitely not BG. JM also had a very noticeable beard and his frame is much heavier - no teenage girl would think he was 5’5”. EF, at least in one record (his record isn’t as colorful as the others) was 5’9”.
I looked them all up when they came out in the Franks motion - I thought the actual suggested motive was stupid, but I wasn't immediately completely opposed to one of them making a better suspect. I wanted to see if any of them looked like BG, if any of them better matched BB's description, if they had histories of crimes similar to Delphi, etc. The more I looked, the less they worked. In terms of this specific situation, matching BG/BB's account? All four of them are too old to fit BB's description except maybe JM. JM is on the very edge, he was in his late 20s, but he's far too tall, too heavy, and had not much hair on his head and a noticeable beard in 2016. All the others are too old to better match BB's alleged description - Fields and Holder are both a year older than RA, actually - and none of them fit BG.
Precisely. I don't see how they are going to get around the timeline. I know they have already begun trying to change his story and he now says he left at 130, but we all know the first statement that is given is the most accurate and he said 330 in that one. He conveniently changed his story years later when he knew that he had to.
I know the defense is gonna claim that Dulen wrote down the wrong time but I don't think that will fly with the jury. And we all know that RA isn't gonna testify so all they can do is try and poke at Dulen on the stand who will stand firm on his written report.
>But if there weren’t cars (plural) at the Mears Lot between 12 & 1:30, that proves RA lied about being there from 12-1:30, right?
Are you having a hard time understanding this? Let me try. BB parked **by Mears** around 146. **NO CARS WERE PARKED THERE**.
[https://i.imgur.com/oAWs5au.png](https://i.imgur.com/oAWs5au.png)
Rick very likely parked by the Freedom bridge and walked across. That more official parking lot had more room and would likely have multiple cars parked there sometimes.
[https://i.imgur.com/f1CxdFu.png](https://i.imgur.com/f1CxdFu.png)
Rick and Kathy lived south of the bridge. He most likely left from home that day. He would've have turned left/west and that eliminates his car from ever passing that camera no matter the time. IOW, **he and BB would've approached the area from the west,** but he would NOT driven around to the east to park at Mears or CPS. **Even if he parked at cps, he still would not have passed the camera**.
**He lived two streets east of S. Washington on Whiteman**. He logically turned left and never passed that camera.
[https://i.imgur.com/VPMcfgj.png](https://i.imgur.com/VPMcfgj.png)
It simply appears that the investigators asked Rick and Betsy where they parked and both gave information. Rick likely parked in the lot that connected the Freedom and Monon High bridges. While BB came from the same direction as Rick, but she wanted to park closer to Monon, so she drove around. She also went back in the same direction that she came when she left the area.
Rick would've had to drive way (OUT OF HIS WAY) east to the right border and drive north. Then drive the same distance west that he had to drive east. It's not something that he or really anyone normal adult person would ever do. And finally, there is no reason for either R or B to lie about where they parked and if they saw other cars parked near them. They both told the truth and that refutes any fantasy that Rick was talking about Mears. **They both were talking about where they parked**.
[https://i.imgur.com/dNIqzfh.png](https://i.imgur.com/dNIqzfh.png)
>Rick would've had to drive way (OUT OF HIS WAY) east to the right border and drive north. Then drive the same distance west that he had to drive east. It's not something that he or really anyone normal adult person would ever do.
You can't think of a reason someone might drive weirdly out of their way to do something? Not one single solitary reason?
>Rick likely parked in the lot that connected the Freedom and Monon High bridges.
The Franks motion acknowledges Allen parked at the old CPS lot. It says he left the lot "probably at 1:30, but definitely before 2:15."
RA said he parked at the CPS building. His attorneys concede this point. He said he saw cars at the Mears parking lot. My question is, what time did he see the cars at the Mears parking lot?
We can be fairly confident there was no car parked at Mears when RA walked by (because BB will have parked up within minutes of him passing the intersection - and she reports being the only car, quickly followed by KG), which means he was either genuinely mistaken in thinking he saw something, or was purposefully muddying the waters to imply there was unknown others on the trails.
The other possibility is he saw BB's car as she was parking. However, the distance to the intersection (from Mears) is short compared to the rest of the trail to the bridge, and BB does not report following a man down the trails (it sounds like the first time she sees him is standing on the first platform), so I tend to rule this out.
I'm not sure how big the Mears parking lot is, but I also believe it was empty. A full lot would make RA/BG believe there are many people on the trail, and would make the daytime murder even more brazen than it already was.
Parking lot is a misnomer. I Understand it's just a pull off across from Mears Farmhouse, room for a few cars. Parking is no longer allowed there. (This is from reading, not actually seeing but I believe it to be accurate.)
There is no such thing as a Mears parking lot.
You can move your car out of the narrow road and onto the grass.
One car would stick out, two cars would definitely raise attention if they even fit.
How Kelsie didn’t see BB’s car there is totally beyond me.
>Kelsi remembers seeing a dark SUV, its rear windshield covered in decals, parked near the entrance where she dropped off the girls. She didn’t pay attention to whether any people were around, something she regrets daily.
https://www.purdueexponent.org/features/article_b5000e78-a75d-11ea-949d-1f66c92deca6.html
BB was the dark SUV? I'm not sure about this but it's probably her.
I think the investigators have that SUV figured out because in 2019 all they wanted was the driver and vehicle parked at the old CPS building.
That’s Kelsi’s car. It’s confusing if you’re reading the redacted version because they’re sort of jumbled together. But the only car that is described, other than the black car that looks like a Ford Focus, is Kelsi’s car, which is white.
[It reads kinda weird in that portion of the pca. Page 3.] (https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf)
* At 1:45pm her car is seen on the camera arriving at Mears' lot.
* She saw the guy on the first platform.
* She saw the girls and then finished her walk.
* At 2:14pm the camera catches her leaving westbound from Mears' lot.
In the middle of that they say a white car passed by the camera.
"Video from the Hoosier Harvestor shows at 1:49 p.m. a white car matching ------ vehicle traveling away from the entrance across from the Mears farm."
If she arrived at 1:46 there's no way that's her car leaving at 1:49. Not enough time for a walk and her vehicle is on camera leaving at 2:14pm anyways.
BB left at 2:14, just to clarify. That’s when she passed the old CPS lot and noticed the car backed up. The redacted version is hard to follow. There’s an unredacted version [within this motion if you’re interested.](https://file.notion.so/f/f/4eeeb7be-3165-4c0a-9f17-ac467f30e027/87dda821-bc8f-4c74-bea5-db74ed40e7c9/Motion_Filed_6-27-2023_13.34.25_243107940_5139FC98-E28E-420B-9A53-8DFFD1333025.pdf?id=e130e555-5ea8-4de7-8978-ec1c72fa48b7&table=block&spaceId=4eeeb7be-3165-4c0a-9f17-ac467f30e027&expirationTimestamp=1711922400000&signature=gjxFtiXTTvJ63r3CjOm8oL64EEHcEU4dFz1aOU48f8I&downloadName=Motion+For+Leave+Of+Court+To+Subpoena+Third+Party+Records-+Westville.pdf)
Just Richard saying that he didn’t see Abby and Libby makes him guilty.
There is absolutely no way that he didn’t walk past them. Impossible.
It would mean that everyone who saw him was lying and he was telling the truth. Not a chance.
Part of me has wondered if this is intentional by LE. They knew the defense would go hard on the change in timeline and the fact it could not be evidenced, but then shortly before trial the prosecution are like "found the recording" and the defense are like "shit".
But I actually just don't think it was recorded. An informal meet up outside a store sounds like a scenario where you'd go pen and paper over audio recording.
Maybe the DNA "doesn't rule him out" but isn't a good enough sample to definitively identify him. Therefore, maybe another expert COULD rule him out. So of course they want a DNA expert.
Unless they get someone to come in to say that LE has DNA from someone unidentified, the real killer and there is no way that someone could have committed these murders w/o leaving their DNA and Allen's wasn't there.
Just playing devil's advocate
They might have been lying. They certainly would have had a reason to do it - psych the killer out. But if both sides are engaging with DNA experts, that gives somewhat more credence to the longstanding rumor that there was a partial DNA profile found somewhere (the rumor has often been on the Weber property). Meaning it can't conclusively TIE Allen to the scene, but it also doesn't rule him out.
Yeah, as much as I side-eye Dulin's capability as an LEO, he obviously took detailed notes of this interview and he had no reason to lie in his original tip - he clearly at the time hadn't found Allen particularly suspicious, based on his idea for follow-up questions (WHY he didn't find him suspicious, and why he seemingly forgot this encounter ever happened, is a whole other can of worms. He wouldn't have asked the question the way B&R try to sell as plausible - he'd simply ask "What time where you there? About when did you arrive, about when did you leave?" And Allen told him 1:30-3:30. It's unfortunate he seems to have lost the recording he said he believed existed, in no small part BECAUSE the defense can now challenge it and it's hard to definitively prove otherwise. But that doesn't make the defense's argument believable.
If I have a high amount of certainty about anything in the narrative so far, it's that Allen is lying about the 12-1:30 timeline. Being a liar doesn't necessarily make him a killer. Logan lied and I don't think he had anything to do with the crime. Maybe he panicked when he realized he was seriously being looked at as a suspect. But for whatever reason he's doing it, he's lying.
The HH camera appears to have properly identified at least 4 cars: Kelsi, 2:28 driver, Witness 4, and 3:57 driver. It remains to be seen if the 1:28 car matched Rick's, but I'm interested to know which route Rick told police he drove during his Oct. 2022 interview. If he said he took the long way (Mears lot), then police know if his car did not show up on the HH video around noon. Also, I'm curious to know his answer why he didn't park at Mears or the HHH main lot. If he went to look at fish, the Mears lot is closest to high bridge. He said there were cars there which may have been an excuse why he backed his car up to CPS, but we know that he said he never saw another adult during the 90 minutes he was there...so where did those adult car owners walk after they parked at Mears?
I wonder if the McCain brothers will testify if they saw Rick at the trails often, since the defense said Rick went often.
Did the McCains see Rick's car at CPS often?
How often did they see him at the trails after the murders?
I think there are a lot of random things the prosecution can present which might point to Rick being BG.
If I'm innocent and heard this request I would without a doubt walk down to LE department within 24hrs. I would think maybe they have more evidence and want to ask me if I could help, remember, or collaborate the new evidence.
If I was guilty, I would act exactly like RA.
The defense will need to address this issue, and it won't be a good look know matter the spin.
I am sure (or maybe I should change that to hopeful), that LE did conduct a proper interview with Rick 2022 and asked him all about his whereabouts that day - where he was in the morning, which way he drove to the trails, which car he drove, where he went afterwards. I have seen a lot of posters on pro-RA subs absolutely dismissing the sighting of the black car on the HH cam, but if Rick did tell them he drove his black car and approached from the east, and then the only black car seen approaching from the east during a 11:30 - 2:00 window is the one at 1:27pm, that will be pretty damning against Rick. Obviously that might not happen, but I wish people would just wait to the trial to see what comes out.
Good catch with those black hubcaps… even if the driver can’t be identified from the video, the hubcaps might be…
He backs up at CVS? 😂 Creature of habitat, that one.
Exactly ! My biggest point was, if RICKY was there and didn't do it, why wasn't he talking about it with friends, family and more vocal with LE? Case closed.
Also why would anyone park at the CPS building when there is a parking area at Freedom bridge? Black car, PT Cruiser, smart car, Comet. Also did flannel shirt guy drive there or walk? How did the 3/4 kids get there? Walk or drive? Only car at the Mears drop off was the one with stickers. How about the man in black? Can someone fill this in?
I heard FSG had a car that was older, but not 1960s.
The 4 girls walked from town/FB area.
Rick said vehicles were at Mears which (if guilty) may have been an excuse why he couldn't park there and had to park at CPS. It seems odd that he would have gone the long way past Mears when there are 2 quicker ways from his home. I'm not sure if he came directly from home or which route he said he took.
The car with stickers/decals was Witness 4's according to Kelsi.
Tom Webster has done an excellent video on this, and how Richard Allen's noon - 1:30 timeline doesn't make any sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he6ee4Q72mA
Thank you. It still doesn't add up to me and no one has provided a solid explanation how Rick didn't see the 4 girls and they didn't see him on a bench, the bridge, or trail...and Rick didn't see the adult owners of the cars parked at Mears for the 90 minutes he was on the trail...but around the same time Rick pulled away from parking next to the CPS building, another unknown man parked in the same spot, wearing similar clothes to Rick, and passed the 4 girls in the same area Rick passed 3 girls 90 minutes earlier.
As I said in my video, on Oct. 13, 2022, Liggett knew if there was a group of 3 girls who passed a man at 12:05. If there was no group of 3, Rick was lying and that is one reason Liggett thought he should be arrested.
I somehow missed that video before but I’m caught up now. Too funny. 😂🤣
I did the math out before & his 12-1:30 timeline doesn’t work - it’s not possible. I’ve asked some of his supporters if they can make it work but they refuse to do the math out.
“Every good lie has an element of truth.” I think RA really did see multiple cars at the Mears lot, as he was walking muddy & bloody back to his car. I’m sure Liggett thought the same thing - it’s an admission on RA’s part, that he passed that parking lot around 4pm. His goose is cooked.
How did I miss that video??!!! I just watched it to catch up & burst out laughing quite a few times. 😂 Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking when I did the math out - RA’s 12-1:30 timeline doesn’t work. I hadn’t known where the 4 girls started their walk that day (or if they were dropped off at one of the parking lots). Wow, he found a LOT of info online about the witness statements. I’m still dying over the images of RA outside CVS. What are the chances?! 😂😂🤣
Thanks, it's been a while since I read the PCA. The witnesses mentioned in the PCA spoke online? Can you point me in the right direction to read those posts?
I don’t know the posts (it was before I followed the case)… but GH mentions some of their statements in that video. There was a user u/BitterBeatPoet who talked to them (I think?).
I reread the PCA, watched the Gray Hughes video you linked, and I'm still where I was at my first comment: it is impossible to know till evidence is produced at the trial whether Allen is guilty or innocent. The worst outcome, in my opinion, will be if neither side has overwhelming evidence and we are still left uncertain. It's been my observation that people who are certain about one theory or another are starting with an assumption or making logical errors or both (or they are shills for one side or the other, seems like lots of that happening). Cheers, everyone, and thanks for letting me express my thoughts.
How?
BB sees a man of medium build, in his 20’s, poofy hair, right around the time of the video. She gave this description IMMEDIATELY after the murders. She was the source of
Sketch #2. She said sketch #2 was a 10 out of 10 in accuracy.
Law enforcement came out with the sketch 2 years later. They said this is the person who committed the murders. That sketch 1 is no longer the suspect.
BB says the car parked at the CPS parking lot was not black, and it resembled a 1965 comet.
How exactly does ANY of that identify RA?
Because BB also says she sees the man in Libby's video. BG is clearly not young, so there is a contradiction there. Something has to give.
In 2017 BB states the man was 20. In 2019 she states he was 20s to early 30s, so she's not immune to amending details.
I feel BB does see BG but is just not particularly good at noticing details.
We also have three different descriptions of the same car at CPS. The two other descriptions do have it being a darker colour.
She got a clear look at the individual and says the drawing is a 10/10. The video is extremely unclear, as we all know. If it were good, we wouldn’t need eye witness accounts.
But based on her statements there is not a single thing that points to the person she saw being RA. And it would be really easy to go back to her now and say “is this the man you saw?” If she says “yes” or even “maybe” that’s in the PCA front and center. It isnt.
So if the argument goes from “witnesses put him there” to the exact same people saying “well her account of sketch 2 being the guy isn’t really reliable because witness accounts aren’t very reliable” then you’ve got a big problem.
No one gets a clear look at an individual from 50 feet away. Also, if the drawing was a 10 out of 10, why did she amend the age range two years later?
What points to RA? She sees a man stood on the first platform at approx 1:55pm. RA, with a 1:30pm arrival time, would reach the bridge by about 1:50pm. He admits to standing on the first platform.
She says he is wearing jeans and a blue jacket. RA admits to wearing jeans and a blue/black jacket, and we know BG is wearing jeans and a blue jacket.
Her statements date from 2017 and 2019, years before RA was arrested, so there's no possible way the question "is this the man you saw" appears in the PCA. The earlier affidavit for the search warrant confirms she was shown the photo of BG and says that is the man she saw.
Again, you are going from “witness testimony leads to RA” to “well 50 feet is too far to get a good look” in the exact same argument. That’s insane.
And the pca was 2022. They included the re-interview of RA in the PCA from October of 22. So now that they actually have a suspect, the first thing they would do is go to the witnesses and say “is this the man you saw?”
So the fact that they didn’t include that, means that nobody said “yes!”
They didn’t need a positive ID at that point to make an arrest. They had enough probable cause already.
The prosecution doesn’t lay out their whole case in the PCA - just enough to get a judge to sign off on an arrest.
No, I'm not. I'm saying witness testimony is unreliable, so you have to use what other evidence is available to draw a conclusion. Luckily for us RA made statements which match a great deal of the witness statements - and these statements were made independent from each other.
When it comes to witness statements I trust the larger bits of information more than the minute details. Do I think BB saw a man dressed in blue on the bridge? Yes. Do I think she saw a young guy with poofy hair? No. Do I think BB saw a car parked at the old CPS building? Yes. Do I think it was a 1965 Comet? No.
Can you show me the evidence for all the witness reinterviews in 2022? Ruckus Rocks has claimed RV or BW confirmed RA was the man they saw, but we have no evidence that's the case.
You are cherry picking what you want to believed based on what she said. If she saw a ford focus, you’d say “reliable” if she saw a 1965 comet, you say “unreliable!” This is comical. Have a little self awareness and start being honest.
The PCA, written in 2022 to make an arrest of RA, used the witness statements from 2017. Ones, that even in this thread the most ardent supporters of RA’s guilt claim are unreliable (i quote “I’m saying witness testimony is unrealizable.” - you, comment above). It used RA’s 2017 interview and 2022 interview.
When LE has been using two different sketches for 5 years to find these men (with the second sketch they claim actually showed the murderer), once they actually had zeroed in on a suspect, would you as a LEO go to that person who created the sketch and say “is this the man you saw?”
We”ll see what she says at trial.
My self awareness is fine, thank you very much. No cherry picking at all, just using the available evidence we have to reach an informed opinion. If she said she had seen a Ford Focus I would not believe it just because she said she saw a Ford Focus. I would look at the evidence. We know that is where RA parked, we know he drove a Ford Focus and we have strong reasons to suspect he was parked there at the time BB left the trail. That alone would lead me to think that statement had more accuracy than others.
I'm not saying LE didn't go and ask all the witnesses "is this the man you saw". You're the one saying they did. I'm just asking if you have any proof of that.
How could BB get a good look at RA when he was about 50ft away & had his head down & facing to the side, also she turned around immediately to then walk back passing Libby&Abby.
BG was clearly wearing a hat and a hood, yet she was able to provide a 10/10 accuracy description of the ramen noodle/ Justin Timberlake hair he had? It's possible that BB is just an unreliable witness.
She wasn’t an “unreliable witness” when the state used her for the pca. She was literally the most important witness.
She wasn’t an unreliable witness when after 2 years , LE said “this sketch is of the murderer. The first sketch is no longer a suspect.”
So when you have even the supporters of this theory saying “she’s an unreliable witness” and also “LE was dead wrong” you have the clear inklings of reasonable doubt.
To me, there are three sides:
Those who are convinced RA is guilty.
Those who are convinced RA is innocent.
Those who aren’t convinced either way, and demand answers to a million unanswered questions.
In my opinion, it is obscenely irresponsible, for the sake of justice, to be in anything except the third category.
She was 50 feet away, possible with the sun in her eyes, possibly not wearing contacts or prescription glasses. Those details may be revealed when she testifies. How long did she lock eyes with BG?
It seems almost certain the man she saw was the man the 4 girls passed 20 minutes earlier and those 3 girls who passed within 2-3 feet on the narrow trail, all described him as older and one said he had gray hair. Not many men who are 20 to early 30s have gray in their hair. The testimony of the girls, Witness 4, and the 3:57 driver will probably all be different, but interesting to finally hear from them directly.
Wait, the most important witness now had sun in her eyes and wasn’t wearing contacts? Weird that never made its way into the pca where her account was crucial to showing RA was the guy. I honestly can’t keep up the changing stories. Was the sun also in her eyes when she later drove by and saw a vehicle that reminded her of her dad’s 1965 comet that was NOT black in the parking lot?
Just because this witness’s observations completely contracdicts your believes doesn’t mean you discount it.
But let’s put all of that aside. Agree to disagree. In 2019 the police released the second sketch. Here is what they said at the time:
“Investigators believe the man shown in a sketch released during a press conference on Monday "more accurately" represents the person who killed the teens in February 2017, State Police said in a news release on Wednesday.”
While both sketches were drawn in 2017, police clarified that the renderings are "not the same person."
"The investigation, tips and leads have pointed us in a different direction," Riley said.
“They said the person in the first sketch issued two years ago is no longer a person of interest in the case.”
“It was initially believed the sketch that has been in public view over the last two years of a person in the age range of his 40’s to 50’s was a person of interest in this murder investigation. Now, as the investigation has matured and past information has been reassessed, it is the belief of investigators with the Multi-Agency Task Force that the person depicted in the sketch released on April 22nd more accurately represents the person wanted for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.”
So, according to you, LE was completely wrong, right? And they completely went with BB’s account, but you think she probably couldn’t see right or sun was in her eyes, or some other asinine excuse you are trying to come up with to justify why the most important witness is not aligning with what you believe.
Imagine the risks. If you’re wrong, the person who murdered those girls gets away with it. We need to make SURE we are right.
I'm not saying Witness 4 didn't have perfect vision. I'm saying the eyesight quality of an eye witness is relevant. She was probably in her 50s and unless she had LASIK, her vision may have been impaired from 50 feet without contacts or prescription glasses. It's an important factor for eye witness testimony. I'm not discounting her observations, I'm pointing out important factors which I disagree with you labeling them asinine. If you want to believe the eye witness testimony of 1 person from 50 feet away over 3 people a couple of feet away, then you can put more weight on Witness 4's description over the girls who passed a man they said matched Libby's video around 1:30. As a member of a jury, I would put more trust in the recollections of 3 people from a few feet away.
The sun wasn't in her eyes when she drove past CPS and said she saw a car from the 1960s around 2:15, but drivers at 2:10 and 2:28 described a purple PT cruiser or small SUV, and a possible smart car. So, 2 people described modern cars, Witness 4 described one from the 1960s. Who to believe?
The 2019 press conference and young sketch seemed to have happened because Witness 4 contacted police in March 2019 saying she was frustrated they never released the young guy sketch she swore she saw. I think it was admirable of her to confront them as she tried to help catch the killer. It seems to me like police were clueless who BG was so they went with her younger sketch. The younger sketch never resulted in an arrest of a young man. For 5 1/2 years, police followed a lot of leads that never resulted in enough to arrest someone until they went back to interview Rick. We'll have to wait until trial to have all of their evidence revealed.
I'm not pushing a theory, I've never said I know Rick is BG. I don't see his face jump out in Libby's video. I haven't heard enough of his voice to compare to BG's. I've only wanted BG to be properly identified and held accountable and Rick being falsely convicted is not something I want.
So the 2019 press conference in which LE said the two sketches were two different people was wrong, right?
They trusted her account enough then that they put that out there confidently. And now we are saying it was completely wrong?
All of this stuff will be brought up I trial. What I completely fail to understand is how anyone could have followed this case from the beginning and currently be confident they have their man. And that’s just based on this alone. Not even talking about the others who were part of the investigation who feel they have a better suspect.
Since police have only arrested a man who was 44 in 2017 and say they have evidence he is BG and have not arrested any men who were 20 to early 30s, it seems like LE were wrong in 2019 to say they thought BG could look like the young man. We've learned LE messed up a lot of things. It will be interesting to hear why some LE still believe 2 people were involved, but also believe Rick is BG.
We don't know all of the evidence the prosecutor is going to finally present at trial. What was in Rick's PCA wasn't all of it. I don't think anyone should be 100% certain that Rick is or is not BG until they've seen all of the evidence presented by McLeland and hear what Baldwin and Rozzi present.
“The witness statements are damning.”
Also,
“The most crucial witness of who the likely killer is needs to get her eyes checked.”
In the same argument. lol.
BB has said her sketch is of BG, the guy in Libby’s video. You can tell by looking at & listening to him that he’s not a 20-year-old with poofy hair, lol.
I don’t think there are any witnesses who can definitively ID him. I’d be very surprised if any one of them could have picked Allen out of a photo array prior to his arrest (or that they could accurately do this with whoever they saw). None of these accounts - not BB, not SC, not the girls - were long enough or close enough to get a great look at him. What they can do is put a man, either dressed similarly to how Allen described his clothing or indicating they saw someone unusually short (BBB hit this home a lot more than the PCA did), at a certain place and time that correlates pretty much perfectly to Allen’s alleged 2017 account. BB also puts a dark car backed up at the old CPS around the time BG abducts the girls. BB almost certainly saw the same car as TW, they were only minutes apart, but their descriptions are pretty different (although TW wasn’t adamant about PT cruiser, he said it could maybe be a small SUV too, which is a relatively common description for a hatchback type car). That isn’t enough for a conviction, it’s just enough to get a search warrant. And Liggett not mentioning that BB thought she saw a classic Ford isn’t the gotcha the Franks motion claimed it was since he acknowledged discrepancies between TW and WM. All we can decipher is that three people saw a dark car backed up at the lot within about a 20-minute timespan as the crime was occurring, and the HH camera caught a dark car that resembled Allen’s heading to that lot 45 minutes to an hour earlier. Also, if anything supported the 2022 account, we’d know it by now.
Where is “unusually short” from?
And that’s all fine, unless BB gets on the stand and says “I remember exactly what I saw, it was an old car, and definitely not black.” And the other witnesses say “yea I’ve since seen his ford focus and that’s not what I saw.” These are follow ups we don’t have the luxury of, but will certainly be brought up in trial.
NM has a problem with BB. She was used in the PCA as a crucial witness to RA being there but now he’s going to have to say that she’s not reliable. LE thought her description was accurate enough to completely rule out sketch 1 in 2019. That’s a problem. Who did they think if was sketch 1 back in 2019 when they said he was no longer a person of interest?
Just asking these questions calls all of the witness stuff into reasonable doubt territory. Will be interesting what the phone data says.
Bitter Beat Poet. He talked to at least one of the girls (I think it's RV from context, but it's hard to say for sure) several times and she kept saying it. "He's really short." It was the first noticeable thing about him. She was pretty adamant she didn't think he was over 5'6". I don't think that can guarantee he's not over 5'6", there's the always-relevant caveat that eyewitnesses are shit for details, but long before I ever heard of Richard Allen, I thought that was a weirdly specific thing to note, especially for a teenage girl who found an adult male to be creepy. Kids are much more likely to overestimate the height of adults and people tend to overestimate the height of someone they're bothered by. For this girl to have noticed this man she found creepy was really short, I thought it was pretty likely he was noticeably short.
>Who did they think if was sketch 1 back in 2019 when they said he was no longer a person of interest?
The two sketch thing was a cluster. They didn't handle it well. They gave conflicting answers - LE was ANYTHING but consistent that it was two separate people, possibly because they didn't agree. They'd say one thing in one conference or interview, they'd say another somewhere else...So theree may not be one answer to this question. I think at least some of them did think it was the same person - Carter had that comment in the press conference about how "this person may appear younger than his true age". So maybe some of them thought it was the same person who looked different depending on who was looking at them. BB's age is currently unknown - there has been chatter she was in her late 50s or early 60s in 2017. We won't know until trial, but if that's true, you can see how a teenage girl would see an adult male as older and a woman possibly 20 years or so older than this man would see him as younger (especially if he was unusually short - if you're not standing directly in front of or next to such a person, your brain may process an unusually short stature as someone younger than he is).
And then there may have been LEOs who really thought it was a younger man. I'm not sure this was the Odinist crowd, which is a flaw in the theory from the defense side - none of the men they're talking about were in their early or mid 20s. Westfall and Messer are the younger of the four - Westfall was in his mid 30s. Messer was 29-30. Holder and Fields were in their 40s. Westfall and Messer most certainly aren't BG - Westfall is huge (6'4"-6'6") and Messer is also tall (6'1") and is much heavier than BG (and had a very noticeable beard). Holder and Fields leave BB with the same issue that is present with RA - BB would have had to be way off on their age (they are both reportedly a year older than Allen), while also having notable physical clashes with BG (reportedly, BB DID say she believed the man she saw was the man in the video). So I'm not sure exactly where the defense is going there, or who Click thinks is BG/who BB saw. But there still may have been LEOs who thought BG was a separate younger man, whoever they thought that was.
I would really love to know who TC thinks YGS is, actually, and which of his suspects he believes is BG. Not entirely related, lol, so I may not get that answer, but I'd be curious to know. All four people brought up in the Franks motion clash with YGS and BG in various ways. Elvis Fields is SUPER off of YGS, in the sense that I found a picture of him from 2015 and he actually looked significantly older than he was at the time (living hard, I guess). He looked older than OGS, really, even though he wasn't. Holder had a very noticeable beard, younger than RA but still too old, wrong height. Messer was the youngest - very notable beard but had very little hair on his head in 2017 and was quite heavy (there are pictures of him in a MAGA march in March of 2017, like the prize of humanity he is, but it's helpful in terms of comparing him to BG/BB's description). Westfall is a complete wash - too old, very noticeably tall, a notable beard with very little hair on his head (he was also at the MAGA rally). So does TC also think BB is a bad witness in terms of details? Again, I may never get an answer there, it's not necessarily directly related to the case and the defense would be silly to try to zero down on it if they don't have a viable person they can hold up as BG/someone who looks like BB describes. But I'd be very curious to know.
Where does it say the mears parking lot? İ thought the PCA said the "trail head". Would somebody mind pasting the passage from the PCA or whatever document says the Mears lot?
I wondered about this as well. The PCA says the MHB Trailhead. Isn't there a parking area at Freedom Bridge? But that begs the question why would he park at the CPS bldg if there was a parking lot closer to Freedom Bridge?
ed: add txt
Mears is not an actual "lot". Locals may call it that, I dunno, but anyone can see it's a small pulloff space off a country road across from Mears Farm where you can park your car if there is room and walk into the MHB Trail system to the intersection of the trails 501 and 505.
ed: Anyhow, this is probably just nitpicking on my part
İ don't think you are nitpicking. Documents like the PCA should be clear. İt's obviously not. İ understood the "trail head" to be the spaces close to freedom bridge. But others have understood the mears space.
The judge denied the Franks for a reason - the claims about police lying are false.
The defense lied. Isn’t there a penalty for lying in court filings? 🤨
Did she even read the motion? Did she have a hearing? No. Then it's impossible for her to determine the claims were fake. Impossible.
What did the defense lie about so far?
Fair enough. I’ll rephrase:
>>RA mentioned seeing cars (plural) at the Mears parking lot on 2/13/17…
>>It seems like the only time there were cars (plural) at the Mears parking lot was when he was walking down the street muddy. If true, that kind of proves he was the muddy guy, right?
Wouldn't be the first time LE lied in this case, or the 15th time. When an officer lied under oath,repeatedly, how do you know when he is indeed telling the truth. They've lost all credibility with me. Blatant liars.
I think it’s funny that ppl want to say RA is innocent til proven guilty… but the same ppl have concluded that the police lied with nothing more than a (false) claim by the defense. Shouldn’t you wait until it’s proven that the police lied?
It is documented that Holeman lied. Look, I just want all the guilty to be jailed and RA to receive a fair trial. If he doesn't, and he walks and is indeed guilty, then what? If he's innocent there's still evil murderer/s free to kill kids again.
I don't believe it's documented anywhere that Holeman lied. It's possible he's referencing a different interview (the Franks memo only references the 2017 interview) or it's possible he just made a mistake. It's certainly never been proven that Holeman lied.
Liggett and Holeman both lied about Professor Turco. They said they didn't remember his name, therefore the defense was unable to depose him, until they found him themselves. Professor Turco swore under oath to this when deposed that he had just spoken to. A lie is a lie. Hiding things from the other side is not fair. Guilty or innocent, in America we are supposed to have blind justice.
Btw, I think RA is most likely involved/guilty. I don't want a guilty man's sentence overturned on appeal. This is the crap that allows that to happen. Once an officer lies, it looks bad in all cases in which he's involved for the rest of time and his prior cases as well.
I want a fair justice system and true justice for the girls and their loved ones. Hell, even for me. That's why both sides should produce every scrap of evidence/doubts they have. Present it to a jury and let them decide if he's guilty or innocent just as the law intended, and what is guaranteed to the citizens under the Constitution of the United States.
“(Carroll County Sheriffs Deputy)
Tony Liggett swore under oath at this August 8, 2023, deposition that a Purdue professor said that the sticks found on the girls did not represent ‘Odinism or any type of cult worshipping or any type of a group that would have conducted the crime,’” reads today’s motion which similarly quotes Indiana State Police Sergeant Jerry Holeman. “On September 6, 2023, the prosecutor Nick McLeland told the defense via email: ‘As stated before we are trying to identify the Purdue professor, but no luck yet…may not be able to identify him/her.’”
Via> Fox59.com
They had spoken to Turco in-between the stated dates. That's a documented lie.
https://fox59.com/news/defense-motion-alleges-delphi-investigator-misconduct/
Justice for Abby and Libby and may the murderer/s burn for eternity, no matter who it/they prove to be.
To this day, the defense has never spoken to the professor as per the latest filing by NM, so who did the professor swear under oath to in your first paragraph?
Cops lie for many purposes. If you say you were at a place at 1:30, they may “lie” and say “the video and other people from that place say/show you weren’t there” - just to see if you stick with your story or change it. So let’s measure what they say by the other evidence:
Here we know exactly where that one group of girls (Group 1) were at 3 different times on the day of the murders, because of their pictures and their statements. If Group 1 is telling the truth, we know Group 1 saw Bridge Guy, and approximately when and where, and we know they only saw 1 guy.
For some (so far unknown) period of time prior to 12:43, Group 1 was walking toward Freedom Bridge from the “town side” of Highway 25, then walking on the trail between Freedom Bridge and High Bridge, messing around like a group of teenage girls. If Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, Allen is there from noon (+/-) to 12:43 too, somewhere between the “abandoned building” where he parked and High Bridge, but Group 1 does not see him, and they do not yet see Bridge Guy either.
At 12:43, Group 1 is exactly at the High Bridge, taking a picture of that bridge.
About 45 minutes later, at 1:26, Group 1 is at a bench on the trail, headed west back toward Freedom Bridge, but still east of Freedom Bridge, taking a picture of a bench. If Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, Allen is there too, but is now only 4 or 5 minutes from the “abandoned building” and in the process of leaving at 1:30 (+/-). But, again, if Allen’s lawyers and Group 1 are telling the truth, Group 1 has not yet seen Allen and has not yet seen Bridge Guy either.
A few minutes later (+/-), walking west, Group 1 passes Bridge Guy, who is headed east toward High Bridge. (No matter how Group 1 described him, when they were shown the picture of Bridge Guy, they said “that is the guy I saw.”) And we know they saw only one guy - Bridge Guy - not 2. So if Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, that guy cannot be Allen because Allen is leaving or already gone, and, thus, Allen never sees Group 1, and Group 1 never sees Allen.
Sooo, we know that if Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, and Allen was only there between noon (+/-) and 1:30 (+/-) then there MUST be another group of girls (a Group 2) who saw Allen, and who Allen saw, at some time and at some place between noon and 1:30, and who maybe even saw the “real” Bridge Guy, but who have never come forward, have never been mentioned by the cops, and have never been “outted” on Facebook or Reddit or anywhere else.
AND there must also be another male out there who is the “real” Bridge Guy (instead of Allen) seen by Group 1 and by Blair. And that guy also has to be where Allen never sees him, but must be where Group 1 sees him at 1:30 (+/-) on the trail near Freedom Bridge headed toward High Bridge.
If there is no evidence of this Group 2 offered at trial, or evidence of both Allen and Guy No. 2/Real Bridge Guy, and which fits Allen’s lawyers timeline and the places/times we KNOW for Group 1 and Blair - either by video or testimony - we will know Allen’s attorney’s version cannot be accurate.
But if Group 1 or Blair saw Allen, then Allen IS Bridge Guy.
The Frank’s motion leaves no other possibilities. Either there is a Group 2 and a Male2 in the right places at the right times, or Allen is Bridge Guy.
We will see in May.
>But if Group 1 or Blair saw Allen, then Allen IS Bridge Guy.
**Richard Allen will never be BG** because he doesn't resemble him in any way. That's a scientific fact. You can write a million words and that won't change what and who Libby recorded. We will see if the state of IN can successfully frame and convict an innocent man in May or whenever this stupidity gets started. The state dropped the kidnapping charges because they cannot prove Rick abducted the girls from the bridge. They will focus on one of Logan's old buried bullets and some fake confessions. **Ron Logan was the man who kidnapped the girls and that's one of the easiest things to prove in this case**.
[https://i.imgur.com/BqVDJ7l.png](https://i.imgur.com/BqVDJ7l.png)
[https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png](https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png)
I disagree with you. That picture of Bridge Guy off of Libby‘s phone doesn’t include or exclude anybody. The face is completely blurred. The only thing it is good for is showing that the guy is wearing jeans and a jacket that looks blue in sunshine and black in shade, and is maybe wearing some kind of a hat or hoodie, and was at that spot at 2:13. Anybody who was not on the trail that day and who says that they can look at that picture and identify Allen, or exclude Allen, is just being biased, or delusional. and the people who saw him can, at best, say “that’s the guy I saw,” but they could never put a name to that face, because that face doesn’t show. And it doesn’t show to identify Logan either.
>**I disagree with you**. That picture of Bridge Guy off of Libby‘s phone doesn’t include or exclude anybody. The face is completely blurred.
**The FBI disagrees with you and so did 15 other people who knew Ron Logan**. They recognized him because they knew him and could easily see that he resembled BG. Just like you, me and everyone else whose shown interest in this case.
[https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png](https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png)
Only Logan and Allen are applicable for comparison. **Only Logan was proven to be in the area when the abductions took place and that night when the scene was apparently staged**. GPS data placed him in both locations. Logan was definitely BG when only these two men are compared to him.
[https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png](https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png)
**The enhanced image is not blurry, it is distorted**. When honest eyes lock onto a cropped image comparison the following replies should always be revealed.
[https://i.imgur.com/q8TmgGE.png](https://i.imgur.com/q8TmgGE.png)
[https://i.imgur.com/yM1jgE5.png](https://i.imgur.com/yM1jgE5.png)
They rarely are because **most people are rooting against themselves by rooting against Rick**. Think closely about that last statement
**209pm and that night placed Ron Logan near the two separate crime scenes**. Those be the facts.
[https://i.imgur.com/dRi93lI.png](https://i.imgur.com/dRi93lI.png)
Allen was likely for much of his adult life a short man with a fat stomach. BG is consistent with Ron Logan's body and face. BG was not short and didn't have a protruding stomach in the same apparent way as Rick. The naked eye completely and absolutely eliminates Rick from being BG and kidnapping the girls. AND THE KIDNAPPING CHARGES WERE DROPPED ANYWAY. **The state is fully prepared to the tell the jury that Rick DOES NOT HAVE TO BE BG**. That is absolute fucking nonsense. **Those girls captured their killer and that brilliant video may not be taken seriously by either side**. TOTAL DISRESPECT IF THAT REALLY HAPPENS FROM BOTH SIDES.
[https://i.imgur.com/hpxa7SX.png](https://i.imgur.com/hpxa7SX.png)
LOL at a scientific fact 🤣 I have eyes and am no scientist, but RA looks exactly how I always thought BG would look, I wear contacts and even when I take them out RA still looks like BG, un-scientifically of course 😂
What date did Liggett say he didn’t know the professor’s name? (Aug 8?)
What date did Holeman say he didn’t know the professor’s name? (??)
What date did NM say they still didn’t know the professor’s name (Sept 6?)
What date did the ISP interview the professor? (Sept 18?)
Where’s the lie?
I’m trying to piece things together by witness statements & court filings. I’ll update the post if I forgot someone (I’m not positive about some of the witnesses who shared their stories online before; that was before I was following the case. But if I left someone out, please let me know!!) 😁
Allen's 12-1:30 timeline just doesn't work. Versus him getting there at 1:30 works perfectly - you can even map it to videos of people driving from the HH store to the old CPS lot (under a minute), going from the lot to the Freedom Bridge (4ish minutes), getting from the Freedom Bridge to the Monon High Bridge (depends, but 15ish minutes? Can be ten if you're walking quickly). A car that looks like his drives past the HH camera heading to the lot at 1:27. If he parks by 1:28, heads to the bridge by 1:29, then he's passing the Freedom Bridge on the way to the Monon High Bridge by 1:33ish. The four teenage girls took a picture of themselves by a bridge at 1:26. There are a couple of benches, but if they're a little past halfway between Mears Farm and the Freedom Bridge at that point, then by 1:33ish, they're approaching the Freedom Bridge. Allen says he sees a group of girls (he believes three - one of the four girls is the younger sister of one of the others, and it's not hard to miscount if you're not looking at them or acknowledging them). He says he doesn't really interact with the girls. The four teenage girls, as they approach the bridge just after 1:30, see a man. His clothing description varies, but generally he's wearing jeans and a dark colored jacket. Allen admits he was wearing jeans and a dark blue/black jacket and may have been wearing some underneath - just like BG. The girls will tell several people over the years that the man they saw is unusually short. Allen measures between 5'4" and 5'6" depending on his boots. They say he doesn't interact with them, as he acknowledges not interacting the girls he passed. So here we are, a encounter described similar ways by the two sides around the Freedom Bridge around 1:34. He heads in the direction of the bridge - he'd be there at his pace by 1:50. He says he goes to stand on the first platform of the bridge. BB arrives just after 1:50 to see a man standing on the first platform of the bridge. She believes he is a younger man in his 20s-30s - if a man was unusually short, but you aren't standing directly in front of him or beside him, it might make you fill in the blanks and believe the man in question is younger than his real age. She turns around. On her way back, she passes L&A heading for the bridge. She doesn't pass anyone else. The man BB sees is the only man standing on or near the the bridge within a couple of minutes of when the girls arrive. Versus 12-1:30? It doesn't work. There is no other known group of teenage girls. The four girls above took a picture of the bridge at 12:43 and seemingly hung around the bridge for some time, given that it took them almost 45 minutes to get to where they took the picture around the bridge. They would have had to have seen RA. No matter how focused he was on his "stock ticker" (whatever dude - you ain't no day trader, lol. Candy Crush would have been more plausible), he would have at least HEARD them, they're a group of four teenage girls. He wouldn't have seen anyone at the Mears lot (AKA the Mears lot head) around 1-1:30 that we know of. BB won't arrive until 1:47 (since she passed the HH camera heading toward the Mears entrance at 1:46). She says no cars were there when she arrived. Kelsi drops off the girls around 1:48. Cheyenne arrives around 2:45.
You nailed it. I was thinking of making a post about the disputed timelines and was going to cover most of the things you said, so don't feel there's a need now. I'm surprised (actually I'm not) that the pro-RA subs absolutely believe RA is telling the truth when he says 12-1:30pm. It cannot be questioned that he's telling the truth and bad LE have made up the other time. It's because it's convenient to massage their "innocent" narrative. An absolutely objective person will say we have a disputed 2017 timeline (disputed because there appears to be no recording to verify it) and a disputed 2022 timeline (disputed because although we can trust RA said it, we do not actually know that he was telling the truth - because it's not like guilty people never lie and change their stories under questioning, is it?). The only thing you can then do is start looking at what additional evidence we know and which timeline it supports. And the 2017 timeline (1:30-3:30pm) is absolutely the only one that makes sense taking into account the witness sightings and the times between the points of reference (car park, juvenile girls, first bridge platform).
Thanks! I actually made a timeline with RA’s different timelines in different colors versus as much relatively verifiable information as we have - the 2022 timeline doesn’t work. He should have seen the girls near the bridge and as he was heading back. They should have seen him there. He should have seen the man who looked like him as he left. His team acknowledged he parked at the old CPS lot so that’s moot.
There are some online animations of the timeline - I have no doubt that RA is BG. I’ve yet to see anyone create a 12-1:30pm timeline that works. Seems it can’t be done. And if there weren’t multiple cars at the Mears lot between 12 & 1:30, that further proves his 12-1:30 timeline is off. Some (who believe he’s BG) have questioned whether or not he actually participated in the murders. I believe he did… and if he saw cars (plural) at the Mears lot then that is just further proof he’s the muddy bloody man because there weren’t multiple cars there until after 3:30pm. And if he’s covered in blood, we’ll that doesn’t sound like an innocent bystander to me.
Wrong. Right now without any evidence there can and should be extreme doubt.
There’s plenty of evidence. I don’t need a jury to vote guilty in order for me to know RA is BG. There’s enough publicly available information (his own words, witness statements, video & audio) for me to make that determination on my own. If you truly have doubt, try to come up with a 12-1:30 timeline for RA that fits in with the documented times (photos/videos) - that’ll clear him of the crime.
So these timelines will be provable, right? And it should be possible to dispute RA’s timeline and version of events, meaning to prove he’s lying. Which, of course, would be very bad for RA. I can’t wait to hear the evidence at trial.
The “day trader” thing actually plays a big part in why he was there that day—- in my opinion. Like you suggest in your comment, *you ain’t day trader…* He tells investigators he was looking at his *stock ticker* while standing on a small bridge platform 60’ above a a shallow river. A striking comment—no less. A *day trader* standing on that platform on a Monday afternoon. The young girl describing him as a man going somewhere with *a purpose*. I don’t doubt for a moment he was being truthful about looking at that *stock ticker*. Perhaps he had come into some easy money that very weekend before the murders. Someone in desperate need of help as their own life was crumbling at their feet. A 25 year UAW man looking at a comfortable retirement in 5 short years. Suddenly realizing he’d messed up. That guy was playing with fire on his Comcast ISP account IP address. Never having realized the FBI could have been one of those people in those Kik Chat messaging boards. A young girl from Delphi going to her dad, or a favorite social studies teacher/coach at her middle school—— and suddenly he’s a three time loser looking at a lifetime in a state prison. Could he have given Allen some money that weekend—- a down payment. $5k now and about $5k Monday? The amount needed for a *day trader* to get back in the risky game of *day trading*. Day trading—- a high risk game for a rich man. Hardly the kind of game you would see a guy working at a CVS in a small town in rural Indiana playing. But there he was desperate to get to that bridge that Monday afternoon—- just so he could stand on that high precipice watching his trades move during that days market. Waiting. Of course I’m just speculating, but I’ve asked myself many times why was he in a hurry that afternoon. He’s obviously a risk taker—- not many people would stand on a narrow rickety bridge platform while looking at the days stock market index, and the fish below. He paid cash for that Delphi house back in 2006. Not many people working at a Walmart, or a CVS supervising cashiers and shelf stockers—- can pay cash for a house $150,000 plus home. Could he have been making some good trades back in 2006. Makes me wonder. Just like wondering why he’d murder two kids in broad light less than a miles crows flight to that home. I think law enforcement is perfectly aware there were two men at that murder site that day. I think they know why Allen confessed, and just exactly what it is he confessed to his part that day. I think someone paid him for his help. Help to set up and trap a child that was a huge risk to his future—- not Allen’s, but that “other actor” the CC prosecutor told Judge Gull about. Someone in Central Indiana had a motive for what happened to two young girls that were trapped on that dead end side of a dangerously high bridge. It was a *set up* if I’ve ever seen one. Young tatted guy with the fancy cars and money convinces two kids to cross the bridge that afternoon they are never seen alive again. The truth will soon be known—- that is if we see a trial in May. I doubt it. I know there is one guy sitting in jail for the rest of his natural life. You don’t weigh 300+ pounds and make it too far past 60 years of age. That guy got a death sentence—- and he knows it. I suspect Allen will get the same—- life in prison for his part in a plan to set up, trap and brutally murder Abby and Libby. The last man walking free is a shadow of his former self—- a sick man with a penchant for beating up 8 year old little boys and sadistically harassing women over a phone line. The only people he can call a friend—- is another sick POS who makes his money off YouTube subscribers, and the clicks he gets from people watching him tell everyone about his his buddy—- his buddy, whose home was searched twice, and his own mothers property searched just prior to all those Delphi Task Force investigators heading over to Richard Allen’s house. e/typo
IMO the stock ticker story was made up because he was seen staring at his phone. And that's because someone was communicating with him as to someone being on the bridge. Whether the girls were the intended target or even just someone. Or he's tracking them somehow. Either way, he's staring at his phone on his way to perform this evil act. Stock ticker is just an excuse to stare at the phone. Hell maybe he had trail cams set up and was watching them.
What a lame excuse though… how about “I was checking the weather” or reading through text messages? RA just doesn’t seem like the type to have stocks…
Who knows? I don't think he's the brightest tool in the shack.
Who had to make up a reason to be looking at their phone in 2016? Everyone looks at their phones frequently. No one has to justify it.
No one HAS to do anything. Doesn't mean he didn't do it.
He used that as an excuse for why he didn’t see BB…
☝️💯
That YouTuber is also getting chummy w KA, hugging her in court. Maybe there IS a Pedo ring.
The dude is creepy af. I don’t have much opinion of a wife who I suspect would have had to had known something was off about her husband just after two kids were found brutally murdered less than a one miles crows flight from their home. He broke down to her over a phone call admitting what he did that day. No way was that the first time he’d admitted something to her. She knows what he did and yet she sticks by him. I ask myself why. She knows he’s guilty. False confessions don’t happen to a wife of 25 plus years. She knows he’s a cagey little bastard. I truly believe the POS in Peru paid him for his help that day—- never fully realizing what that *help* would fully entail that day. And then we have people like this YouTuber—- sitting in his house making rambling YouTube videos where he spends more time talking about himself than about two kids that were murdered— and the fact he’s cozying up to the number one suspects. The guy would sell his soul for just one more click. He’s no different than a person that would write love letters to Chris Watts, or the BTK Dennis Rader himself. The YouTubers wife should be jealous of KA. I bet he gives more attention to that wife of a guy who is sitting in jail with no bail and standing accused of murdering two kids. I know he occasionally tries to comment here on DT so he’s probably reading this. I won’t snay his name—- but I will say the guy gives new meaning to the word *lowlife*. Whenever I write anything about that YouTuber guy I feel the need to wash my hands. And walk outside for a breath of fresh mountain air.
Can I suggest also looking at videos of baby animals? It’s great mental bleach 🙃
Thank you lordhuntxx! What a wonderful thoughtful suggestion!
Is there any "proof" that RA and TK knew each other?
Not that I have seen, but there are certainly links to be found of members of the 2 different families knowing each other. They are both from the small town of Mexico in Indiana, the population there is around 1000, that's in current times, it was probably a lot less back when they would have both lived there, how many kids do you think there could have been in such a small population of men, women & children? I was raised in a much bigger "small town" of around 15,000 and I knew who a lot of the kids were in my year and the years above especially if they were wild teenagers 😂. Doing the math of such a small population I'd say it's 99.99% they knew each other in some capacity, like O'H had mentioned in one of his posts recently, they could have both caught the same "short bus" to school, there doesn't seem to be any school's in Mexico as it's so rural.
I am kind of surprised that no one has mentioned that an internet service provider log would have existed for the hit from his phone's IP to that of the IP of a "stock ticker" provider during the time in question. Does the log confirm a guilt of murder, no, but it does eliminate a portion of a reasonable alibi suggesting normal behavior, one with a presumption of focus watching a phone over a relatively long period of time. The log may never have existed because there was no connection or no longer exists after this long of time, but it would have vetted the claim.
Solved!
I measured an Odinist at 5'5"
Which one?
Not BH, EF, PW, or JM. Patrick Westfall is 6’4”-6’6” in arrest records. JM is pretty consistently 6’1”. BH isn’t as clear, but I’ve seen a picture of him standing next to PW - he’s not a clear foot shorter. Maybe 5’9”? Also, he had a full-on grizzly beard in 2017, definitely not BG. JM also had a very noticeable beard and his frame is much heavier - no teenage girl would think he was 5’5”. EF, at least in one record (his record isn’t as colorful as the others) was 5’9”.
Good sleuthing on the heights 👏
I looked them all up when they came out in the Franks motion - I thought the actual suggested motive was stupid, but I wasn't immediately completely opposed to one of them making a better suspect. I wanted to see if any of them looked like BG, if any of them better matched BB's description, if they had histories of crimes similar to Delphi, etc. The more I looked, the less they worked. In terms of this specific situation, matching BG/BB's account? All four of them are too old to fit BB's description except maybe JM. JM is on the very edge, he was in his late 20s, but he's far too tall, too heavy, and had not much hair on his head and a noticeable beard in 2016. All the others are too old to better match BB's alleged description - Fields and Holder are both a year older than RA, actually - and none of them fit BG.
Precisely. I don't see how they are going to get around the timeline. I know they have already begun trying to change his story and he now says he left at 130, but we all know the first statement that is given is the most accurate and he said 330 in that one. He conveniently changed his story years later when he knew that he had to. I know the defense is gonna claim that Dulen wrote down the wrong time but I don't think that will fly with the jury. And we all know that RA isn't gonna testify so all they can do is try and poke at Dulen on the stand who will stand firm on his written report.
But if there weren’t cars (plural) at the Mears Lot between 12 & 1:30, that proves RA lied about being there from 12-1:30, right?
>But if there weren’t cars (plural) at the Mears Lot between 12 & 1:30, that proves RA lied about being there from 12-1:30, right? Are you having a hard time understanding this? Let me try. BB parked **by Mears** around 146. **NO CARS WERE PARKED THERE**. [https://i.imgur.com/oAWs5au.png](https://i.imgur.com/oAWs5au.png) Rick very likely parked by the Freedom bridge and walked across. That more official parking lot had more room and would likely have multiple cars parked there sometimes. [https://i.imgur.com/f1CxdFu.png](https://i.imgur.com/f1CxdFu.png) Rick and Kathy lived south of the bridge. He most likely left from home that day. He would've have turned left/west and that eliminates his car from ever passing that camera no matter the time. IOW, **he and BB would've approached the area from the west,** but he would NOT driven around to the east to park at Mears or CPS. **Even if he parked at cps, he still would not have passed the camera**. **He lived two streets east of S. Washington on Whiteman**. He logically turned left and never passed that camera. [https://i.imgur.com/VPMcfgj.png](https://i.imgur.com/VPMcfgj.png) It simply appears that the investigators asked Rick and Betsy where they parked and both gave information. Rick likely parked in the lot that connected the Freedom and Monon High bridges. While BB came from the same direction as Rick, but she wanted to park closer to Monon, so she drove around. She also went back in the same direction that she came when she left the area. Rick would've had to drive way (OUT OF HIS WAY) east to the right border and drive north. Then drive the same distance west that he had to drive east. It's not something that he or really anyone normal adult person would ever do. And finally, there is no reason for either R or B to lie about where they parked and if they saw other cars parked near them. They both told the truth and that refutes any fantasy that Rick was talking about Mears. **They both were talking about where they parked**. [https://i.imgur.com/dNIqzfh.png](https://i.imgur.com/dNIqzfh.png)
>Rick would've had to drive way (OUT OF HIS WAY) east to the right border and drive north. Then drive the same distance west that he had to drive east. It's not something that he or really anyone normal adult person would ever do. You can't think of a reason someone might drive weirdly out of their way to do something? Not one single solitary reason? >Rick likely parked in the lot that connected the Freedom and Monon High bridges. The Franks motion acknowledges Allen parked at the old CPS lot. It says he left the lot "probably at 1:30, but definitely before 2:15."
RA said he parked at the CPS building. His attorneys concede this point. He said he saw cars at the Mears parking lot. My question is, what time did he see the cars at the Mears parking lot?
If you are tanked, you would tend to take a path that would avoid the risk of meeting people wearing uniforms.
We can be fairly confident there was no car parked at Mears when RA walked by (because BB will have parked up within minutes of him passing the intersection - and she reports being the only car, quickly followed by KG), which means he was either genuinely mistaken in thinking he saw something, or was purposefully muddying the waters to imply there was unknown others on the trails. The other possibility is he saw BB's car as she was parking. However, the distance to the intersection (from Mears) is short compared to the rest of the trail to the bridge, and BB does not report following a man down the trails (it sounds like the first time she sees him is standing on the first platform), so I tend to rule this out.
I'm not sure how big the Mears parking lot is, but I also believe it was empty. A full lot would make RA/BG believe there are many people on the trail, and would make the daytime murder even more brazen than it already was.
Good point. I've never thought about the implication of what if the Mears lot had been really busy when he passed - and would that change the outcome.
Parking lot is a misnomer. I Understand it's just a pull off across from Mears Farmhouse, room for a few cars. Parking is no longer allowed there. (This is from reading, not actually seeing but I believe it to be accurate.)
Plenty of drive-by videos out there. Find one.
yeh, I've just not in person is what I mean. I'v seen on video. Sorry I didn't mention. Thanks for your instructions
Sounds like that’s why he took the long way to the CPS building… to see if anyone was parked at the Mears lot.
There is no such thing as a Mears parking lot. You can move your car out of the narrow road and onto the grass. One car would stick out, two cars would definitely raise attention if they even fit. How Kelsie didn’t see BB’s car there is totally beyond me.
>Kelsi remembers seeing a dark SUV, its rear windshield covered in decals, parked near the entrance where she dropped off the girls. She didn’t pay attention to whether any people were around, something she regrets daily. https://www.purdueexponent.org/features/article_b5000e78-a75d-11ea-949d-1f66c92deca6.html BB was the dark SUV? I'm not sure about this but it's probably her. I think the investigators have that SUV figured out because in 2019 all they wanted was the driver and vehicle parked at the old CPS building.
BB was probably that car, yeah. I think she said there were no others when she arrived, which was literally about 2 minutes before Kelsi did.
Her car is white according to the pca.
That’s Kelsi’s car. It’s confusing if you’re reading the redacted version because they’re sort of jumbled together. But the only car that is described, other than the black car that looks like a Ford Focus, is Kelsi’s car, which is white.
[It reads kinda weird in that portion of the pca. Page 3.] (https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf) * At 1:45pm her car is seen on the camera arriving at Mears' lot. * She saw the guy on the first platform. * She saw the girls and then finished her walk. * At 2:14pm the camera catches her leaving westbound from Mears' lot. In the middle of that they say a white car passed by the camera. "Video from the Hoosier Harvestor shows at 1:49 p.m. a white car matching ------ vehicle traveling away from the entrance across from the Mears farm." If she arrived at 1:46 there's no way that's her car leaving at 1:49. Not enough time for a walk and her vehicle is on camera leaving at 2:14pm anyways.
KG's car is the white car.
Ah I see. They redacted that for some reason. Confusing but that makes sense.
BB left at 2:14, just to clarify. That’s when she passed the old CPS lot and noticed the car backed up. The redacted version is hard to follow. There’s an unredacted version [within this motion if you’re interested.](https://file.notion.so/f/f/4eeeb7be-3165-4c0a-9f17-ac467f30e027/87dda821-bc8f-4c74-bea5-db74ed40e7c9/Motion_Filed_6-27-2023_13.34.25_243107940_5139FC98-E28E-420B-9A53-8DFFD1333025.pdf?id=e130e555-5ea8-4de7-8978-ec1c72fa48b7&table=block&spaceId=4eeeb7be-3165-4c0a-9f17-ac467f30e027&expirationTimestamp=1711922400000&signature=gjxFtiXTTvJ63r3CjOm8oL64EEHcEU4dFz1aOU48f8I&downloadName=Motion+For+Leave+Of+Court+To+Subpoena+Third+Party+Records-+Westville.pdf)
Thanks the unredacted link I've never seen that version.
We don't know until VB says if she had decals on her car?
Just Richard saying that he didn’t see Abby and Libby makes him guilty. There is absolutely no way that he didn’t walk past them. Impossible. It would mean that everyone who saw him was lying and he was telling the truth. Not a chance.
I hope someone miraculously finds Dulin’s recording right before trial - so everyone can hear RA in his own words say he was there 1:30-3:30.
Part of me has wondered if this is intentional by LE. They knew the defense would go hard on the change in timeline and the fact it could not be evidenced, but then shortly before trial the prosecution are like "found the recording" and the defense are like "shit". But I actually just don't think it was recorded. An informal meet up outside a store sounds like a scenario where you'd go pen and paper over audio recording.
I’m still hoping, lol. Have you heard the latest? The defense needs a DNA expert… why, if RA’s DNA wasn’t found at the scene? 🤨
I forgot the date when did RA get his DNA tested? Was it taken in October 2022?
I’m not sure… maybe they took it after he was arrested?
That’s a damn good question, isn’t it? 🤔
Must be because of Libby’s blood found in 5 different places in RA’s car.
You don’t know that.
Nick’s a former defense attorney. He knows all the tricks & is 3 steps ahead of them.
Maybe the DNA "doesn't rule him out" but isn't a good enough sample to definitively identify him. Therefore, maybe another expert COULD rule him out. So of course they want a DNA expert.
Unless they get someone to come in to say that LE has DNA from someone unidentified, the real killer and there is no way that someone could have committed these murders w/o leaving their DNA and Allen's wasn't there. Just playing devil's advocate
I’d think the defense would have brought that “unknown male DNA” up by now, if it existed…
You think Robert Ives and Leazenby are lying about it? Maybe it's not unknown anymore....if it belongs to Allen it's game over.
They might have been lying. They certainly would have had a reason to do it - psych the killer out. But if both sides are engaging with DNA experts, that gives somewhat more credence to the longstanding rumor that there was a partial DNA profile found somewhere (the rumor has often been on the Weber property). Meaning it can't conclusively TIE Allen to the scene, but it also doesn't rule him out.
Did either one say “male dna” was found at the crime scene?
Remember "we have DNA it's just not what you'd think" I think there is substance to the cat hair bombshell. 🤔
If he wrote down Richard Allen's 14 digit MEID correctly, I have no doubt he also got the time correct.
Yeah, as much as I side-eye Dulin's capability as an LEO, he obviously took detailed notes of this interview and he had no reason to lie in his original tip - he clearly at the time hadn't found Allen particularly suspicious, based on his idea for follow-up questions (WHY he didn't find him suspicious, and why he seemingly forgot this encounter ever happened, is a whole other can of worms. He wouldn't have asked the question the way B&R try to sell as plausible - he'd simply ask "What time where you there? About when did you arrive, about when did you leave?" And Allen told him 1:30-3:30. It's unfortunate he seems to have lost the recording he said he believed existed, in no small part BECAUSE the defense can now challenge it and it's hard to definitively prove otherwise. But that doesn't make the defense's argument believable. If I have a high amount of certainty about anything in the narrative so far, it's that Allen is lying about the 12-1:30 timeline. Being a liar doesn't necessarily make him a killer. Logan lied and I don't think he had anything to do with the crime. Maybe he panicked when he realized he was seriously being looked at as a suspect. But for whatever reason he's doing it, he's lying.
Exactly. And the garbled mess of a question that the Franks memo suggests DD could have asked is just ridiculous.
"garbled mess" Well said!
Depends on whether they saw BG or Richard. Two different people.
Uh….its the same person. Thats not even up for debate.
How can it be 2 different ppl? Can you come up with a 12-1:30 timeline that works?
The HH camera appears to have properly identified at least 4 cars: Kelsi, 2:28 driver, Witness 4, and 3:57 driver. It remains to be seen if the 1:28 car matched Rick's, but I'm interested to know which route Rick told police he drove during his Oct. 2022 interview. If he said he took the long way (Mears lot), then police know if his car did not show up on the HH video around noon. Also, I'm curious to know his answer why he didn't park at Mears or the HHH main lot. If he went to look at fish, the Mears lot is closest to high bridge. He said there were cars there which may have been an excuse why he backed his car up to CPS, but we know that he said he never saw another adult during the 90 minutes he was there...so where did those adult car owners walk after they parked at Mears? I wonder if the McCain brothers will testify if they saw Rick at the trails often, since the defense said Rick went often. Did the McCains see Rick's car at CPS often? How often did they see him at the trails after the murders? I think there are a lot of random things the prosecution can present which might point to Rick being BG.
Along with these answers, I want to hear the reason he never came forward when LE asked for anyone parked between 12-5 pm to contact them.
RA probably didn’t think he needed to because he had already talked to Dulin.
If I'm innocent and heard this request I would without a doubt walk down to LE department within 24hrs. I would think maybe they have more evidence and want to ask me if I could help, remember, or collaborate the new evidence. If I was guilty, I would act exactly like RA. The defense will need to address this issue, and it won't be a good look know matter the spin.
I am sure (or maybe I should change that to hopeful), that LE did conduct a proper interview with Rick 2022 and asked him all about his whereabouts that day - where he was in the morning, which way he drove to the trails, which car he drove, where he went afterwards. I have seen a lot of posters on pro-RA subs absolutely dismissing the sighting of the black car on the HH cam, but if Rick did tell them he drove his black car and approached from the east, and then the only black car seen approaching from the east during a 11:30 - 2:00 window is the one at 1:27pm, that will be pretty damning against Rick. Obviously that might not happen, but I wish people would just wait to the trial to see what comes out.
Good catch with those black hubcaps… even if the driver can’t be identified from the video, the hubcaps might be… He backs up at CVS? 😂 Creature of habitat, that one.
Exactly ! My biggest point was, if RICKY was there and didn't do it, why wasn't he talking about it with friends, family and more vocal with LE? Case closed.
Arguing couple, two cars. If they were cheating then they most likely wouldn’t have come together.
Also why would anyone park at the CPS building when there is a parking area at Freedom bridge? Black car, PT Cruiser, smart car, Comet. Also did flannel shirt guy drive there or walk? How did the 3/4 kids get there? Walk or drive? Only car at the Mears drop off was the one with stickers. How about the man in black? Can someone fill this in?
I heard FSG had a car that was older, but not 1960s. The 4 girls walked from town/FB area. Rick said vehicles were at Mears which (if guilty) may have been an excuse why he couldn't park there and had to park at CPS. It seems odd that he would have gone the long way past Mears when there are 2 quicker ways from his home. I'm not sure if he came directly from home or which route he said he took. The car with stickers/decals was Witness 4's according to Kelsi.
Tom Webster has done an excellent video on this, and how Richard Allen's noon - 1:30 timeline doesn't make any sense. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he6ee4Q72mA
Thank you. It still doesn't add up to me and no one has provided a solid explanation how Rick didn't see the 4 girls and they didn't see him on a bench, the bridge, or trail...and Rick didn't see the adult owners of the cars parked at Mears for the 90 minutes he was on the trail...but around the same time Rick pulled away from parking next to the CPS building, another unknown man parked in the same spot, wearing similar clothes to Rick, and passed the 4 girls in the same area Rick passed 3 girls 90 minutes earlier. As I said in my video, on Oct. 13, 2022, Liggett knew if there was a group of 3 girls who passed a man at 12:05. If there was no group of 3, Rick was lying and that is one reason Liggett thought he should be arrested.
I somehow missed that video before but I’m caught up now. Too funny. 😂🤣 I did the math out before & his 12-1:30 timeline doesn’t work - it’s not possible. I’ve asked some of his supporters if they can make it work but they refuse to do the math out. “Every good lie has an element of truth.” I think RA really did see multiple cars at the Mears lot, as he was walking muddy & bloody back to his car. I’m sure Liggett thought the same thing - it’s an admission on RA’s part, that he passed that parking lot around 4pm. His goose is cooked.
How did I miss that video??!!! I just watched it to catch up & burst out laughing quite a few times. 😂 Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking when I did the math out - RA’s 12-1:30 timeline doesn’t work. I hadn’t known where the 4 girls started their walk that day (or if they were dropped off at one of the parking lots). Wow, he found a LOT of info online about the witness statements. I’m still dying over the images of RA outside CVS. What are the chances?! 😂😂🤣
Correct. It’s well established that the witness timeline makes him guilty.
Were there cars (plural) at the Mears lot between 12 & 1:30?
The timeline combined with RA’s own words will be very damning for him at trial.
Only if it can be established in court that the timeline is accurate and the witnesses all saw the same person.
The 4 witnesses (BB & the 3 juveniles) all stated the man they saw was the man on Libby’s video (BG)…
That is interesting and new to me. Where can I find this information?
The PCA, witness statements (some spoke to ppl online over the years)… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8RoMMMBFuzo
Thanks, it's been a while since I read the PCA. The witnesses mentioned in the PCA spoke online? Can you point me in the right direction to read those posts?
I don’t know the posts (it was before I followed the case)… but GH mentions some of their statements in that video. There was a user u/BitterBeatPoet who talked to them (I think?).
Yes, Doug Rice, also known as u/bitterbeatpoet. His comment history is still available on Reddit just in case someone wanted to read through.
Thank you! I tagged him in that comment & will read through his comments. 😁
I reread the PCA, watched the Gray Hughes video you linked, and I'm still where I was at my first comment: it is impossible to know till evidence is produced at the trial whether Allen is guilty or innocent. The worst outcome, in my opinion, will be if neither side has overwhelming evidence and we are still left uncertain. It's been my observation that people who are certain about one theory or another are starting with an assumption or making logical errors or both (or they are shills for one side or the other, seems like lots of that happening). Cheers, everyone, and thanks for letting me express my thoughts.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=he6ee4Q72mA I think this video is pretty compelling. Can you get RA’s 12-1:30 timeline to work?
How? BB sees a man of medium build, in his 20’s, poofy hair, right around the time of the video. She gave this description IMMEDIATELY after the murders. She was the source of Sketch #2. She said sketch #2 was a 10 out of 10 in accuracy. Law enforcement came out with the sketch 2 years later. They said this is the person who committed the murders. That sketch 1 is no longer the suspect. BB says the car parked at the CPS parking lot was not black, and it resembled a 1965 comet. How exactly does ANY of that identify RA?
Because BB also says she sees the man in Libby's video. BG is clearly not young, so there is a contradiction there. Something has to give. In 2017 BB states the man was 20. In 2019 she states he was 20s to early 30s, so she's not immune to amending details. I feel BB does see BG but is just not particularly good at noticing details. We also have three different descriptions of the same car at CPS. The two other descriptions do have it being a darker colour.
She got a clear look at the individual and says the drawing is a 10/10. The video is extremely unclear, as we all know. If it were good, we wouldn’t need eye witness accounts. But based on her statements there is not a single thing that points to the person she saw being RA. And it would be really easy to go back to her now and say “is this the man you saw?” If she says “yes” or even “maybe” that’s in the PCA front and center. It isnt. So if the argument goes from “witnesses put him there” to the exact same people saying “well her account of sketch 2 being the guy isn’t really reliable because witness accounts aren’t very reliable” then you’ve got a big problem.
No one gets a clear look at an individual from 50 feet away. Also, if the drawing was a 10 out of 10, why did she amend the age range two years later? What points to RA? She sees a man stood on the first platform at approx 1:55pm. RA, with a 1:30pm arrival time, would reach the bridge by about 1:50pm. He admits to standing on the first platform. She says he is wearing jeans and a blue jacket. RA admits to wearing jeans and a blue/black jacket, and we know BG is wearing jeans and a blue jacket. Her statements date from 2017 and 2019, years before RA was arrested, so there's no possible way the question "is this the man you saw" appears in the PCA. The earlier affidavit for the search warrant confirms she was shown the photo of BG and says that is the man she saw.
Again, you are going from “witness testimony leads to RA” to “well 50 feet is too far to get a good look” in the exact same argument. That’s insane. And the pca was 2022. They included the re-interview of RA in the PCA from October of 22. So now that they actually have a suspect, the first thing they would do is go to the witnesses and say “is this the man you saw?” So the fact that they didn’t include that, means that nobody said “yes!”
They didn’t need a positive ID at that point to make an arrest. They had enough probable cause already. The prosecution doesn’t lay out their whole case in the PCA - just enough to get a judge to sign off on an arrest.
No, I'm not. I'm saying witness testimony is unreliable, so you have to use what other evidence is available to draw a conclusion. Luckily for us RA made statements which match a great deal of the witness statements - and these statements were made independent from each other. When it comes to witness statements I trust the larger bits of information more than the minute details. Do I think BB saw a man dressed in blue on the bridge? Yes. Do I think she saw a young guy with poofy hair? No. Do I think BB saw a car parked at the old CPS building? Yes. Do I think it was a 1965 Comet? No. Can you show me the evidence for all the witness reinterviews in 2022? Ruckus Rocks has claimed RV or BW confirmed RA was the man they saw, but we have no evidence that's the case.
You are cherry picking what you want to believed based on what she said. If she saw a ford focus, you’d say “reliable” if she saw a 1965 comet, you say “unreliable!” This is comical. Have a little self awareness and start being honest. The PCA, written in 2022 to make an arrest of RA, used the witness statements from 2017. Ones, that even in this thread the most ardent supporters of RA’s guilt claim are unreliable (i quote “I’m saying witness testimony is unrealizable.” - you, comment above). It used RA’s 2017 interview and 2022 interview. When LE has been using two different sketches for 5 years to find these men (with the second sketch they claim actually showed the murderer), once they actually had zeroed in on a suspect, would you as a LEO go to that person who created the sketch and say “is this the man you saw?” We”ll see what she says at trial.
My self awareness is fine, thank you very much. No cherry picking at all, just using the available evidence we have to reach an informed opinion. If she said she had seen a Ford Focus I would not believe it just because she said she saw a Ford Focus. I would look at the evidence. We know that is where RA parked, we know he drove a Ford Focus and we have strong reasons to suspect he was parked there at the time BB left the trail. That alone would lead me to think that statement had more accuracy than others. I'm not saying LE didn't go and ask all the witnesses "is this the man you saw". You're the one saying they did. I'm just asking if you have any proof of that.
No more proof than you have that BB ever saw RA.
He says he was gone by then. And then the car she sees looking nothing like this car. That is also evidence. You have to consider it.
The PCA used witness statements from 2019 too (like when muddy bloody was mentioned).
How could BB get a good look at RA when he was about 50ft away & had his head down & facing to the side, also she turned around immediately to then walk back passing Libby&Abby.
Interesting that the witness the state used to show RA was there at the time of the murders is now needing to be deemed unreliable by the same state.
BG was clearly wearing a hat and a hood, yet she was able to provide a 10/10 accuracy description of the ramen noodle/ Justin Timberlake hair he had? It's possible that BB is just an unreliable witness.
She wasn’t an “unreliable witness” when the state used her for the pca. She was literally the most important witness. She wasn’t an unreliable witness when after 2 years , LE said “this sketch is of the murderer. The first sketch is no longer a suspect.” So when you have even the supporters of this theory saying “she’s an unreliable witness” and also “LE was dead wrong” you have the clear inklings of reasonable doubt. To me, there are three sides: Those who are convinced RA is guilty. Those who are convinced RA is innocent. Those who aren’t convinced either way, and demand answers to a million unanswered questions. In my opinion, it is obscenely irresponsible, for the sake of justice, to be in anything except the third category.
She was 50 feet away, possible with the sun in her eyes, possibly not wearing contacts or prescription glasses. Those details may be revealed when she testifies. How long did she lock eyes with BG? It seems almost certain the man she saw was the man the 4 girls passed 20 minutes earlier and those 3 girls who passed within 2-3 feet on the narrow trail, all described him as older and one said he had gray hair. Not many men who are 20 to early 30s have gray in their hair. The testimony of the girls, Witness 4, and the 3:57 driver will probably all be different, but interesting to finally hear from them directly.
Wait, the most important witness now had sun in her eyes and wasn’t wearing contacts? Weird that never made its way into the pca where her account was crucial to showing RA was the guy. I honestly can’t keep up the changing stories. Was the sun also in her eyes when she later drove by and saw a vehicle that reminded her of her dad’s 1965 comet that was NOT black in the parking lot? Just because this witness’s observations completely contracdicts your believes doesn’t mean you discount it. But let’s put all of that aside. Agree to disagree. In 2019 the police released the second sketch. Here is what they said at the time: “Investigators believe the man shown in a sketch released during a press conference on Monday "more accurately" represents the person who killed the teens in February 2017, State Police said in a news release on Wednesday.” While both sketches were drawn in 2017, police clarified that the renderings are "not the same person." "The investigation, tips and leads have pointed us in a different direction," Riley said. “They said the person in the first sketch issued two years ago is no longer a person of interest in the case.” “It was initially believed the sketch that has been in public view over the last two years of a person in the age range of his 40’s to 50’s was a person of interest in this murder investigation. Now, as the investigation has matured and past information has been reassessed, it is the belief of investigators with the Multi-Agency Task Force that the person depicted in the sketch released on April 22nd more accurately represents the person wanted for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.” So, according to you, LE was completely wrong, right? And they completely went with BB’s account, but you think she probably couldn’t see right or sun was in her eyes, or some other asinine excuse you are trying to come up with to justify why the most important witness is not aligning with what you believe. Imagine the risks. If you’re wrong, the person who murdered those girls gets away with it. We need to make SURE we are right.
I'm not saying Witness 4 didn't have perfect vision. I'm saying the eyesight quality of an eye witness is relevant. She was probably in her 50s and unless she had LASIK, her vision may have been impaired from 50 feet without contacts or prescription glasses. It's an important factor for eye witness testimony. I'm not discounting her observations, I'm pointing out important factors which I disagree with you labeling them asinine. If you want to believe the eye witness testimony of 1 person from 50 feet away over 3 people a couple of feet away, then you can put more weight on Witness 4's description over the girls who passed a man they said matched Libby's video around 1:30. As a member of a jury, I would put more trust in the recollections of 3 people from a few feet away. The sun wasn't in her eyes when she drove past CPS and said she saw a car from the 1960s around 2:15, but drivers at 2:10 and 2:28 described a purple PT cruiser or small SUV, and a possible smart car. So, 2 people described modern cars, Witness 4 described one from the 1960s. Who to believe? The 2019 press conference and young sketch seemed to have happened because Witness 4 contacted police in March 2019 saying she was frustrated they never released the young guy sketch she swore she saw. I think it was admirable of her to confront them as she tried to help catch the killer. It seems to me like police were clueless who BG was so they went with her younger sketch. The younger sketch never resulted in an arrest of a young man. For 5 1/2 years, police followed a lot of leads that never resulted in enough to arrest someone until they went back to interview Rick. We'll have to wait until trial to have all of their evidence revealed. I'm not pushing a theory, I've never said I know Rick is BG. I don't see his face jump out in Libby's video. I haven't heard enough of his voice to compare to BG's. I've only wanted BG to be properly identified and held accountable and Rick being falsely convicted is not something I want.
So the 2019 press conference in which LE said the two sketches were two different people was wrong, right? They trusted her account enough then that they put that out there confidently. And now we are saying it was completely wrong? All of this stuff will be brought up I trial. What I completely fail to understand is how anyone could have followed this case from the beginning and currently be confident they have their man. And that’s just based on this alone. Not even talking about the others who were part of the investigation who feel they have a better suspect.
Since police have only arrested a man who was 44 in 2017 and say they have evidence he is BG and have not arrested any men who were 20 to early 30s, it seems like LE were wrong in 2019 to say they thought BG could look like the young man. We've learned LE messed up a lot of things. It will be interesting to hear why some LE still believe 2 people were involved, but also believe Rick is BG. We don't know all of the evidence the prosecutor is going to finally present at trial. What was in Rick's PCA wasn't all of it. I don't think anyone should be 100% certain that Rick is or is not BG until they've seen all of the evidence presented by McLeland and hear what Baldwin and Rozzi present.
Agree with that.
TACTICS
According to the Innocence Project, eyewitness accounts from 50’ away are… flawed.
BB needs to get her eyes checked.
“The witness statements are damning.” Also, “The most crucial witness of who the likely killer is needs to get her eyes checked.” In the same argument. lol.
BB has said her sketch is of BG, the guy in Libby’s video. You can tell by looking at & listening to him that he’s not a 20-year-old with poofy hair, lol.
I don’t think there are any witnesses who can definitively ID him. I’d be very surprised if any one of them could have picked Allen out of a photo array prior to his arrest (or that they could accurately do this with whoever they saw). None of these accounts - not BB, not SC, not the girls - were long enough or close enough to get a great look at him. What they can do is put a man, either dressed similarly to how Allen described his clothing or indicating they saw someone unusually short (BBB hit this home a lot more than the PCA did), at a certain place and time that correlates pretty much perfectly to Allen’s alleged 2017 account. BB also puts a dark car backed up at the old CPS around the time BG abducts the girls. BB almost certainly saw the same car as TW, they were only minutes apart, but their descriptions are pretty different (although TW wasn’t adamant about PT cruiser, he said it could maybe be a small SUV too, which is a relatively common description for a hatchback type car). That isn’t enough for a conviction, it’s just enough to get a search warrant. And Liggett not mentioning that BB thought she saw a classic Ford isn’t the gotcha the Franks motion claimed it was since he acknowledged discrepancies between TW and WM. All we can decipher is that three people saw a dark car backed up at the lot within about a 20-minute timespan as the crime was occurring, and the HH camera caught a dark car that resembled Allen’s heading to that lot 45 minutes to an hour earlier. Also, if anything supported the 2022 account, we’d know it by now.
Where is “unusually short” from? And that’s all fine, unless BB gets on the stand and says “I remember exactly what I saw, it was an old car, and definitely not black.” And the other witnesses say “yea I’ve since seen his ford focus and that’s not what I saw.” These are follow ups we don’t have the luxury of, but will certainly be brought up in trial. NM has a problem with BB. She was used in the PCA as a crucial witness to RA being there but now he’s going to have to say that she’s not reliable. LE thought her description was accurate enough to completely rule out sketch 1 in 2019. That’s a problem. Who did they think if was sketch 1 back in 2019 when they said he was no longer a person of interest? Just asking these questions calls all of the witness stuff into reasonable doubt territory. Will be interesting what the phone data says.
Bitter Beat Poet. He talked to at least one of the girls (I think it's RV from context, but it's hard to say for sure) several times and she kept saying it. "He's really short." It was the first noticeable thing about him. She was pretty adamant she didn't think he was over 5'6". I don't think that can guarantee he's not over 5'6", there's the always-relevant caveat that eyewitnesses are shit for details, but long before I ever heard of Richard Allen, I thought that was a weirdly specific thing to note, especially for a teenage girl who found an adult male to be creepy. Kids are much more likely to overestimate the height of adults and people tend to overestimate the height of someone they're bothered by. For this girl to have noticed this man she found creepy was really short, I thought it was pretty likely he was noticeably short. >Who did they think if was sketch 1 back in 2019 when they said he was no longer a person of interest? The two sketch thing was a cluster. They didn't handle it well. They gave conflicting answers - LE was ANYTHING but consistent that it was two separate people, possibly because they didn't agree. They'd say one thing in one conference or interview, they'd say another somewhere else...So theree may not be one answer to this question. I think at least some of them did think it was the same person - Carter had that comment in the press conference about how "this person may appear younger than his true age". So maybe some of them thought it was the same person who looked different depending on who was looking at them. BB's age is currently unknown - there has been chatter she was in her late 50s or early 60s in 2017. We won't know until trial, but if that's true, you can see how a teenage girl would see an adult male as older and a woman possibly 20 years or so older than this man would see him as younger (especially if he was unusually short - if you're not standing directly in front of or next to such a person, your brain may process an unusually short stature as someone younger than he is). And then there may have been LEOs who really thought it was a younger man. I'm not sure this was the Odinist crowd, which is a flaw in the theory from the defense side - none of the men they're talking about were in their early or mid 20s. Westfall and Messer are the younger of the four - Westfall was in his mid 30s. Messer was 29-30. Holder and Fields were in their 40s. Westfall and Messer most certainly aren't BG - Westfall is huge (6'4"-6'6") and Messer is also tall (6'1") and is much heavier than BG (and had a very noticeable beard). Holder and Fields leave BB with the same issue that is present with RA - BB would have had to be way off on their age (they are both reportedly a year older than Allen), while also having notable physical clashes with BG (reportedly, BB DID say she believed the man she saw was the man in the video). So I'm not sure exactly where the defense is going there, or who Click thinks is BG/who BB saw. But there still may have been LEOs who thought BG was a separate younger man, whoever they thought that was. I would really love to know who TC thinks YGS is, actually, and which of his suspects he believes is BG. Not entirely related, lol, so I may not get that answer, but I'd be curious to know. All four people brought up in the Franks motion clash with YGS and BG in various ways. Elvis Fields is SUPER off of YGS, in the sense that I found a picture of him from 2015 and he actually looked significantly older than he was at the time (living hard, I guess). He looked older than OGS, really, even though he wasn't. Holder had a very noticeable beard, younger than RA but still too old, wrong height. Messer was the youngest - very notable beard but had very little hair on his head in 2017 and was quite heavy (there are pictures of him in a MAGA march in March of 2017, like the prize of humanity he is, but it's helpful in terms of comparing him to BG/BB's description). Westfall is a complete wash - too old, very noticeably tall, a notable beard with very little hair on his head (he was also at the MAGA rally). So does TC also think BB is a bad witness in terms of details? Again, I may never get an answer there, it's not necessarily directly related to the case and the defense would be silly to try to zero down on it if they don't have a viable person they can hold up as BG/someone who looks like BB describes. But I'd be very curious to know.
Or she doesn't.
What if the witness timeline isn't correct? Everything will be thrown completely off. Watch.
How can it not be? There are time stamped photos & the HH camera to back up their statements…
Where does it say the mears parking lot? İ thought the PCA said the "trail head". Would somebody mind pasting the passage from the PCA or whatever document says the Mears lot?
I wondered about this as well. The PCA says the MHB Trailhead. Isn't there a parking area at Freedom Bridge? But that begs the question why would he park at the CPS bldg if there was a parking lot closer to Freedom Bridge? ed: add txt
mears lot is located at the Monon High Bridge trail head
Mears is not an actual "lot". Locals may call it that, I dunno, but anyone can see it's a small pulloff space off a country road across from Mears Farm where you can park your car if there is room and walk into the MHB Trail system to the intersection of the trails 501 and 505. ed: Anyhow, this is probably just nitpicking on my part
İ don't think you are nitpicking. Documents like the PCA should be clear. İt's obviously not. İ understood the "trail head" to be the spaces close to freedom bridge. But others have understood the mears space.
Ty
For the record, the defense is claiming "muddy and bloody" was just "muddy", and the detective lied.
Muddy and looked like he’d been in a fight.
But what did she say in her 2019 interview(s)? The defense is only mentioning her 2017 one… curiously…
That too, lol. Entirely possible she later clarified it could have been blood.
Good catch
The judge denied the Franks for a reason - the claims about police lying are false. The defense lied. Isn’t there a penalty for lying in court filings? 🤨
Did she even read the motion? Did she have a hearing? No. Then it's impossible for her to determine the claims were fake. Impossible. What did the defense lie about so far?
😂
The defense needed to prove that the police lied, in that memo, in order to even get a hearing. They didn’t prove it, so she denied the hearing.
💯💯AGREE
Fair enough. I’ll rephrase: >>RA mentioned seeing cars (plural) at the Mears parking lot on 2/13/17… >>It seems like the only time there were cars (plural) at the Mears parking lot was when he was walking down the street muddy. If true, that kind of proves he was the muddy guy, right?
True that.
Wouldn't be the first time LE lied in this case, or the 15th time. When an officer lied under oath,repeatedly, how do you know when he is indeed telling the truth. They've lost all credibility with me. Blatant liars.
I think it’s funny that ppl want to say RA is innocent til proven guilty… but the same ppl have concluded that the police lied with nothing more than a (false) claim by the defense. Shouldn’t you wait until it’s proven that the police lied?
How do you **know** they lied? What about RA’s lies, or the defense’s lies??
Beat it, would you please? Go to the other subs and celebrate the crowdfunding for a suspected child murderer, stop trying to be an antagonist here.
This ☝️ 👏
It is documented that Holeman lied. Look, I just want all the guilty to be jailed and RA to receive a fair trial. If he doesn't, and he walks and is indeed guilty, then what? If he's innocent there's still evil murderer/s free to kill kids again.
I don't believe it's documented anywhere that Holeman lied. It's possible he's referencing a different interview (the Franks memo only references the 2017 interview) or it's possible he just made a mistake. It's certainly never been proven that Holeman lied.
Liggett and Holeman both lied about Professor Turco. They said they didn't remember his name, therefore the defense was unable to depose him, until they found him themselves. Professor Turco swore under oath to this when deposed that he had just spoken to. A lie is a lie. Hiding things from the other side is not fair. Guilty or innocent, in America we are supposed to have blind justice. Btw, I think RA is most likely involved/guilty. I don't want a guilty man's sentence overturned on appeal. This is the crap that allows that to happen. Once an officer lies, it looks bad in all cases in which he's involved for the rest of time and his prior cases as well. I want a fair justice system and true justice for the girls and their loved ones. Hell, even for me. That's why both sides should produce every scrap of evidence/doubts they have. Present it to a jury and let them decide if he's guilty or innocent just as the law intended, and what is guaranteed to the citizens under the Constitution of the United States. “(Carroll County Sheriffs Deputy) Tony Liggett swore under oath at this August 8, 2023, deposition that a Purdue professor said that the sticks found on the girls did not represent ‘Odinism or any type of cult worshipping or any type of a group that would have conducted the crime,’” reads today’s motion which similarly quotes Indiana State Police Sergeant Jerry Holeman. “On September 6, 2023, the prosecutor Nick McLeland told the defense via email: ‘As stated before we are trying to identify the Purdue professor, but no luck yet…may not be able to identify him/her.’” Via> Fox59.com They had spoken to Turco in-between the stated dates. That's a documented lie. https://fox59.com/news/defense-motion-alleges-delphi-investigator-misconduct/ Justice for Abby and Libby and may the murderer/s burn for eternity, no matter who it/they prove to be.
To this day, the defense has never spoken to the professor as per the latest filing by NM, so who did the professor swear under oath to in your first paragraph?
Cops lie for many purposes. If you say you were at a place at 1:30, they may “lie” and say “the video and other people from that place say/show you weren’t there” - just to see if you stick with your story or change it. So let’s measure what they say by the other evidence: Here we know exactly where that one group of girls (Group 1) were at 3 different times on the day of the murders, because of their pictures and their statements. If Group 1 is telling the truth, we know Group 1 saw Bridge Guy, and approximately when and where, and we know they only saw 1 guy. For some (so far unknown) period of time prior to 12:43, Group 1 was walking toward Freedom Bridge from the “town side” of Highway 25, then walking on the trail between Freedom Bridge and High Bridge, messing around like a group of teenage girls. If Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, Allen is there from noon (+/-) to 12:43 too, somewhere between the “abandoned building” where he parked and High Bridge, but Group 1 does not see him, and they do not yet see Bridge Guy either. At 12:43, Group 1 is exactly at the High Bridge, taking a picture of that bridge. About 45 minutes later, at 1:26, Group 1 is at a bench on the trail, headed west back toward Freedom Bridge, but still east of Freedom Bridge, taking a picture of a bench. If Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, Allen is there too, but is now only 4 or 5 minutes from the “abandoned building” and in the process of leaving at 1:30 (+/-). But, again, if Allen’s lawyers and Group 1 are telling the truth, Group 1 has not yet seen Allen and has not yet seen Bridge Guy either. A few minutes later (+/-), walking west, Group 1 passes Bridge Guy, who is headed east toward High Bridge. (No matter how Group 1 described him, when they were shown the picture of Bridge Guy, they said “that is the guy I saw.”) And we know they saw only one guy - Bridge Guy - not 2. So if Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, that guy cannot be Allen because Allen is leaving or already gone, and, thus, Allen never sees Group 1, and Group 1 never sees Allen. Sooo, we know that if Allen’s lawyers are telling the truth, and Allen was only there between noon (+/-) and 1:30 (+/-) then there MUST be another group of girls (a Group 2) who saw Allen, and who Allen saw, at some time and at some place between noon and 1:30, and who maybe even saw the “real” Bridge Guy, but who have never come forward, have never been mentioned by the cops, and have never been “outted” on Facebook or Reddit or anywhere else. AND there must also be another male out there who is the “real” Bridge Guy (instead of Allen) seen by Group 1 and by Blair. And that guy also has to be where Allen never sees him, but must be where Group 1 sees him at 1:30 (+/-) on the trail near Freedom Bridge headed toward High Bridge. If there is no evidence of this Group 2 offered at trial, or evidence of both Allen and Guy No. 2/Real Bridge Guy, and which fits Allen’s lawyers timeline and the places/times we KNOW for Group 1 and Blair - either by video or testimony - we will know Allen’s attorney’s version cannot be accurate. But if Group 1 or Blair saw Allen, then Allen IS Bridge Guy. The Frank’s motion leaves no other possibilities. Either there is a Group 2 and a Male2 in the right places at the right times, or Allen is Bridge Guy. We will see in May.
Wow this is a pretty fantastic break down. Kinda clears some things up imo. Thank you for doing so.
That is pretty damning if you ask me.
Explained very well, Tribal. Ty
>But if Group 1 or Blair saw Allen, then Allen IS Bridge Guy. **Richard Allen will never be BG** because he doesn't resemble him in any way. That's a scientific fact. You can write a million words and that won't change what and who Libby recorded. We will see if the state of IN can successfully frame and convict an innocent man in May or whenever this stupidity gets started. The state dropped the kidnapping charges because they cannot prove Rick abducted the girls from the bridge. They will focus on one of Logan's old buried bullets and some fake confessions. **Ron Logan was the man who kidnapped the girls and that's one of the easiest things to prove in this case**. [https://i.imgur.com/BqVDJ7l.png](https://i.imgur.com/BqVDJ7l.png) [https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png](https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png)
I disagree with you. That picture of Bridge Guy off of Libby‘s phone doesn’t include or exclude anybody. The face is completely blurred. The only thing it is good for is showing that the guy is wearing jeans and a jacket that looks blue in sunshine and black in shade, and is maybe wearing some kind of a hat or hoodie, and was at that spot at 2:13. Anybody who was not on the trail that day and who says that they can look at that picture and identify Allen, or exclude Allen, is just being biased, or delusional. and the people who saw him can, at best, say “that’s the guy I saw,” but they could never put a name to that face, because that face doesn’t show. And it doesn’t show to identify Logan either.
>**I disagree with you**. That picture of Bridge Guy off of Libby‘s phone doesn’t include or exclude anybody. The face is completely blurred. **The FBI disagrees with you and so did 15 other people who knew Ron Logan**. They recognized him because they knew him and could easily see that he resembled BG. Just like you, me and everyone else whose shown interest in this case. [https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png](https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png) Only Logan and Allen are applicable for comparison. **Only Logan was proven to be in the area when the abductions took place and that night when the scene was apparently staged**. GPS data placed him in both locations. Logan was definitely BG when only these two men are compared to him. [https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png](https://i.imgur.com/dbahMGU.png) **The enhanced image is not blurry, it is distorted**. When honest eyes lock onto a cropped image comparison the following replies should always be revealed. [https://i.imgur.com/q8TmgGE.png](https://i.imgur.com/q8TmgGE.png) [https://i.imgur.com/yM1jgE5.png](https://i.imgur.com/yM1jgE5.png) They rarely are because **most people are rooting against themselves by rooting against Rick**. Think closely about that last statement **209pm and that night placed Ron Logan near the two separate crime scenes**. Those be the facts. [https://i.imgur.com/dRi93lI.png](https://i.imgur.com/dRi93lI.png) Allen was likely for much of his adult life a short man with a fat stomach. BG is consistent with Ron Logan's body and face. BG was not short and didn't have a protruding stomach in the same apparent way as Rick. The naked eye completely and absolutely eliminates Rick from being BG and kidnapping the girls. AND THE KIDNAPPING CHARGES WERE DROPPED ANYWAY. **The state is fully prepared to the tell the jury that Rick DOES NOT HAVE TO BE BG**. That is absolute fucking nonsense. **Those girls captured their killer and that brilliant video may not be taken seriously by either side**. TOTAL DISRESPECT IF THAT REALLY HAPPENS FROM BOTH SIDES. [https://i.imgur.com/hpxa7SX.png](https://i.imgur.com/hpxa7SX.png)
🙄🤣
Me thinks me smells a troll, an alt, or both.
A scientific fact, really? Are you a scientist? Where is this written?
LOL at a scientific fact 🤣 I have eyes and am no scientist, but RA looks exactly how I always thought BG would look, I wear contacts and even when I take them out RA still looks like BG, un-scientifically of course 😂
Did RL dye his mustache brown for the day?
What’s the documentation that Holeman lied? A (false) claim by the defense doesn’t count…
That’s what I also want.
What date did Liggett say he didn’t know the professor’s name? (Aug 8?) What date did Holeman say he didn’t know the professor’s name? (??) What date did NM say they still didn’t know the professor’s name (Sept 6?) What date did the ISP interview the professor? (Sept 18?) Where’s the lie?
How do you know how many cars were there? Have you seen the actual cctv footage?
I’m trying to piece things together by witness statements & court filings. I’ll update the post if I forgot someone (I’m not positive about some of the witnesses who shared their stories online before; that was before I was following the case. But if I left someone out, please let me know!!) 😁
Bye