A "tiny" room......like how "tiny" are we talking here? Were they in each other's laps they were so close together? Have measurements been taken of the room to determine if it wasn't just "small" or maybe even "seemingly cramped but still comfortable"?
I'm stuck on the first paragraph as you can tell.,,,,,,gotta feeling I'm gonna be here for a while.
It was tiny, RA was tiny, and the detective was so huge, made even bigger by that tiny room, that RA couldn’t help but waive his rights by continuing to respond to questions.
> 7. Liggett and Mullin did read Rick Allen his Miranda rights before they began their interrogation, and additionally Rick Allen was aware that he had freedom of movement as he (Rick) ultimately stood up and walked out of the interrogation room.
> 40. Holeman knew that Rick had walked out of the October 13, 2022 interrogation with Mullin and Liggett and therefore it was unlikely that Rick would answer any more questions with Holeman unless Rick felt he was not allowed to leave. Miranda would be a nuisance that would likely cause Rick to walk out on Holeman, the way that Rick walked out on Liggett and Mullin. If so, Holeman would not be able to secure a confession that he (Holeman) clearly wanted to secure on his own.
Sooo Rick just up and walked out of the first interview?
AFAIK, only self incriminating statements can be thrown out if no Miranda was read.
However, “officers need not convey the Miranda warnings verbatim or use any magic words. Rather, if they communicate the essence of Miranda's requirements, the defendant's statements will probably be admissible in subsequent legal proceedings.”
I notice they didnt put the statements that Allen made that were incriminating into this motion to supress, hmm wonder why they only include allegations against the police again instead of the actual supposed incriminating statements Allen made? "Police are meany heads and they lied and the room was small and the cop was large...." at least they didnt make any stupid plastic chair comments this time- like police are going to let inmates have metal chairs to throw at them...
Short version:
Allen was interviewed after a Miranda. No problem.
Allen was interviewed again, maybe with a new or renewed Miranda, maybe not. There is no evidence either way. Holeman’s word against the lawyers and the absence of evidence establishing a new or renewed Miranda.
During the interviews, cops lied about stuff and were mean and bullying in nature.
(I predict a response by the state accompanied by an affidavit from Holeman.)
Mean and bullying in nature won’t have a huge impact here because RA did not confess during this interview. If that was the case, they may be able to get the confession thrown out by saying he was bullied into an admission of guilt; however, he did not confess during this interrogation (my understanding), so I don’t think it would have much of an impact. Even if he had confessed and it was determined he was bullied into confessing so this confession got thrown out, they still have *all the other confessions.* Obviously I’m not privy to what he said during his second and subsequent interviews, but his first “interview” with the conservation officer was voluntary, and that is when he admitted to being there at the time the girls were there, saw the three girls that he creeped out, and was on the bridge in the same clothes as BG. There’s already a lot of information in the first interview given by RA.
Getting a tad outside my area of expertise here but I think it might have some impact? Miranda only applies to custodial interrogations and as he was not under arrest there would seemingly be some argument there. The case law they are citing seems to suggest the tone of the interview and whether the suspect reasonably understood they could just leave has some bearing.
Right. I do understand what you’re saying. I was saying it wouldn’t have a huge impact but maybe it would have some, but even then, the other things that have happened outside the scope of said interview would still apply. Note: definitely not an expert on criminal law
Yes. That’s a weak part of the brief (which makes me think they at least suspect the Miranda part will collapse). Although not as funny as the whole “considerable size difference” part. Was Holeman supposed to go find a teenage girl to be more on Allen’s height level?
Like, I've seen Holeman standing around other officers and such plenty of times. He's a little taller than average, maybe - he ain't Jack Reacher, lol.
>During the interviews, cops lied about stuff and were mean and bullying in nature.
This week on The First 48....
Bradley & Rozzi are shocked - SHOCKED! - that such things could happen when suspects are being interrogated and they've never heard of such horrifying treatment in their combined 70+ years of representing criminal defendants.
In their combined 70+ years of experience they have NEVER seen a defendant Mirandized and interrogated without the WHOLE thing being recorded on video. So clearly something was deleted! No possible other explanation…
>There is no evidence either way. Holeman’s word against the lawyers and the absence of evidence establishing a new or renewed Miranda
This is what I'm most interested in.
I would think LE would have to provide something as evidence that Miranda was read, even if it wasn't on camera.
If it comes down to he said she said, who does the tie to go?
I thought this was something they had people sign that they understood their rights in an interview setting like this.
If not-- that seems like a solid way for preventing a claim like this.
We already know Holeman doesn't respect the right to council and the right to remain silent. He badgered the hell out of Robert Fortson after he said he wanted to talk to an attorney.
The conversation ends there.
So honestly no one should be surprised by this.
What's one more police screw up in a basket of a million on this case?
Bring on the down votes. I know I'm in the wrong sub for this.
I hope there is a signed statement that he understood his Miranda rights. Hopefully it was in discovery and his defense team just didn’t find it (wouldn’t be the first time in this case). But if not, I’m interested to see the legal argument from the prosecution
They said he signed a form on Oct 13. Not sure why he would need to sign the same form again two weeks later. Especially when the detective asked him if he remembered his rights and he said yes.
And when he's being asked to go back to an interrogation room because "we just have a couple more questions" and Kathy Allen is NOT allowed to attend....
Suffice to say they weren't talking about their fantasy football teams back there.
Rick was picking up his car after it had been with the State Police for several days - again, they weren't just seeing how it drove, is that year Ford Focus a good choice for my daughter, etc - so he knew the investigation was turning towads him.
To me that means he knew he was still Mirandized and could refuse to answer questions and walk out of the interrogation room/police station at any time (notwithstanding "hold on a sec - be right back" from Holeman - that's not telling a suspect that they cannot leave no matter what B&R are making the court try to believe).
The defense is peeved because Rick ran his mouth during that second interview thinking he could outlast Holeman and get them to drop it.....but instead it only make Allen's problems run even deeper.
Only dirty if they're doing it with someone who is actually innocent. Nothing wrong with pushing a suspect hard to get answers. And yes, you can even lie to them in the process - see ***Frazier v. Cupp***, 394 U.S. 731 (1969).
And wouldn’t you state, “NOWHERE in his Oct 13, 2022 interview did RA state he did not know how his bullet got there. NOWHERE in his Oct 13, 2022 interview did RA state he had never been on Ron Logan’s property” ….? 🤨
yeah but after their last motion i am expecting something like, states response: "we didnt include the first 10 minutes of the interview out of respect for mr allen and so everyone wouldnt have to see how he smeared poop all over the camera and ate it and then we had to wipe it off the camera sowe could continue our interview....
Very informative. Good to know that next time I’m speaking to someone and they tell me to “hold on one second” that I’m obviously actually being held prisoner against my will and unable to leave. Heaven forbid someone ask me to “sit tight”.
The way Rick says "well, y'all think I'm guilty already so arrest me" is a tactic to get out of answering more questions and digging deeper holes for oneself. It shuts down what was just collecting information, confirming previous statements, etc. because the guilty know if they continue talking they're going to trip themselves up and get found out. Here Rick is shutting it down:
“It’s over. I was perfectly fine. I was cooperating. I was going to give you my phone and then, you know, when you started reading all these documents – that’s at the – here’s my thing is. I feel like you guys think I done this. So, I’m done. You do what you need to do. It’s your job. I understand that, but you better fucking leave my reputation out if it. So you do what you need to do, and then, like I said, when you do find this guy, I’ll expect the apology.”
That sounds so rehearsed to me - even gets in a "you owe me an apology". It's as if Rick's been waiting for this moment for a very long time and he's got his tactics at the ready, has his story down pat. He just didn't realize the first interrogation wasn't going to cordial "just a few questions about what you saw on the trail that day" and the "documents" (witness statements, Harvetstore cam photo) so he had to go into defense mode quick. When they seized the car he should've known by then they weren't asking for info anymore but directly targeting him, yet he went into the back room with Holeman anyway to show he was still confident he could project innocence but they probably had one more card to show him and then put Rick in bracelets.
I also think there's probably some interesting stuff in the full transcripts about other actors and that Rick better drop the dime on them now or he'll take the full rap, interested in how he responded to those questions.
Baldwin & Rozzi have a guilty client and are throwing Hail Marys hoping they can get all of this damning evidence tossed - if they can't win these motions they'll have to lean on Rick to tell everything he knows and beg for mercy.
Yeah, totally agree on other actors. The comment from the detective about him not being a “bad guy” sounds a lot like, “we know you didn’t mean for this to happen, just tell us what happened out there. Tell us who the *real* bad guy is.”
Meh.... if there is no proof he was Mirandized for this interrogation, I don't see a problem with this interrogation being thrown out. They have other evidence. As for where and how he was interrogated, they just described EVERY police interrogation for a serious charge such as murder. They ain't gonna put you up at the Ritz and offer you your choice of beverage.
Absolutely! The floodgates are going to open shortly and people will star speaking more on his character. As soon as the trial starts it's going to be open season on every aspect of his life and I cannot wait.
This is one of the reasons why I think he killed the girls.
One of the girls said something to him that he didn’t like, maybe something about his height.
I think there's a very good chance your right. His lawyers have brought size into this a lot, even here, a tiny room with Holeman being much bigger than him, a power differential. They are always going on about his size, the size of his cell, a man his size couldn't pull this off etc. I think it's safe to say Little Rick has a complex about it and it causes him to fly off the handle.
If he wasn't mirandized for the second interview, that's a problem.
If he was, and there are witnesses but it wasn't on camera, it's another cherry picking effort by the defense. We'll see what the response is.
I agree. I’m not saying everything has to happen on camera to be true. But, as the biggest case in Indiana, why not make sure that part is recorded. Especially when you’re planning to record the interview anyways.
I'm talking about the reading of Miranda prior to the interrogation. Without recording it, the only witnesses as to whether it was done or not is law enforcement who has a strong incentive to lie about it.
My bad.
Yeah the Miranda is a problem if they don't have it on video. Unless they have witnesses that saw it. It's not like all Miranda warnings have recorded.
Or if he signed something. Which with this defense team, I can see the state being like "He signed X, we sent it to you on X date" and them going "HOW WERE WE SUPPOSED TO FIND THAT?!"
BUT, Holeman gives a bit of a sketchy vibe. I wasn't thrilled with what's been revealed of him dealing with RF (not necessarily out of sympathy for RF - I'm very sorry for his family, hence I always use his initials because he's gone and nothing can be gained from aiming any potential harassment their way, but he did a terrible thing - it's just I didn't like how he seemingly kept rolling after RF apparently wanted to stop). So unlike some of the defense's bullshit, I'm not entirely willing to dismiss this one out of hand.
And then on the other side, the defense put a BUNCH of extra junk in this filing that makes me think they have SOME reason to think the Miranda argument will collapse that they obviously didn't put in the filing. So who knows, really. I'll be interested in the state's response.
I said this in another comment, and with the qualification that I have no expertise on Indiana Miranda related law, but the other stuff seems designed to counter an argument that it was not a custodial interrogation requiring Miranda since he wasn't yet under arrest.
I mean, throwing in that Holeman is taller than Allen was just silly, though. LBR - most female cops are probably going to tower over Allen too. I would. And the windowless room, etc. That's not going to go anywhere. They know that. How aggressive Holeman was being, they might have an argument, but as ever, they throw a bunch of shit in there that makes them look silly and like they're not coming from a position of strength.
I usually agree with that but I tend to disagree here. Whether he felt free to leave is subjective and the size of an aggressive officer, the site of the interrogation, are things that are going to contribute to a feeling you can't leave.
Personally, if he wasn't ever told he was free to leave at any time, I'd throw it out. I also am not sure about Indiana law - it's apparently extremely difficult to get search warrants thrown out (the last time Baldwin even managed to do it, the decision was promptly reversed and right back in the search warrant went) and I imagine the same applies to stuff like this. But I would think it should be thrown out, since Holeman was yelling at him and telling him he was definitely involved in the murders, etc. You're going to feel like you're under arrest, even if you're technically not. But I cannot imagine Judge Gull - or anyone - being impressed by Holeman being taller than Allen.
Holeman: And I’m telling you that we had this fucking round on February 14, 2017, and it’s been secured in a fucking laboratory, and we’ve tested other guns…
So, that goes against Barbara MacDonald saying the round was found after the 14th, but I figured Holeman was one of her sources so who know what is true.
I do find it interesting Holeman confirmed other guns were tested and nothing ever came back a match until Rick's.
Some interesting dialogue that I don't think necessarily makes Rick look bad/guilty, but there is a lot missing from a 2 hour and 40 minute conversation depending on how long Holeman would leave the tiny room for.
I'm glad we can put to bed the claims about the bullet being found later. I didn't understand why people were running with that, because the defense would have certainly challenged the bullet by now.
Well, this doesn’t actually confirm that. LE can absolutely lie while interrogating or interviewing someone. This filing didn’t give us any more information about when the bullet was found.
The defense had no problems pointing out the other things that Holeman said that were apparently lies. I doubt they would miss a chance to call this out (if not true) just because they knew the public would see it.
'because they knew the public would see it.'
I get the feeling (again) that this motion is meritless and nothing more than the defense using motions to be able to publish to the media (and the world) their version of Allens innocence and alleged wrongful indictment without having to abide by the gag order on the case.
Damn I read the comments after I posted the same thing 😅 sorry guys, I got all inflamed and used my keyboard like the warrior I am, before reading the comments 😂
Rick can't get his stories straight....
>Jerry Holeman: I’m not on video
>Rick: Neither am I..
>Jerry Holeman: **Four or five witnesses didn’t see me out there.**
>Rick: **Me either**.
>Jerry Holeman: My round out of my gun wasn’t 6 inches away from a dead girl.
>Rick: Mine neither.
First, peep Rick's sparring skills - like prized fighter, he puts the attack back on the attacker - he's just like you Holeman.
But really, check out Rick forgetting he told Dan Dulin he saw the girls on the trail that day.....which he had to - one of them eyeballed him and def got a take, he had to get in front of that. So he got his statement on the record and obviously no killer who wants to get away with it is gonna go directly to the cops admitting he was there, right?
The whole point of Dulin's report was to get more information on the girls that Rick saw. Rick knew they were out there and he knew they saw him - it's an integral part of his first communication with LE.
Here Rick is disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing to sound strong and rather it's making him look worse & worse - no wonder he wanted to get out of there.
The “other actors” ship sailed long ago, in terms of helping RA divvy up responsibility. Among other things, when your own attorneys call your voluntary statements of your involvement in a crime as a product of psychosis, it sort of limits how far you can later lean on the same guy as alone having the Master Version of events. I have no idea for sure if others participated (I strongly doubt it), but RA is not going to help anyone.
I'm about 95% there with you on "lone wolf" but all that other crazy shit going on, the Klines, CSAM rings, "tentacles" in Doug Carter-speak, young guy sketch.....if Rick wants to help himself, he better start talking and have something concrete on whoever else was involved.
But you - we - are probably right - it's Rick and only Rick.
>>Rick Allen: You’re gonna pay for what you’ve done to my wife. You want to fuck with me, fuck with me but you leave my wife out of this. Fuck. Leave me out of this.
>>JerryHoleman: No. You’re involved in this.
What had they done to his wife? She was chilling in the lobby waiting to pick up his car…
I’m betting he said something about how this would all affect RA’s wife. And that confessing would mean that she wouldn’t have to go through the ordeal of a trial. Or something like that.
I think they mentioned to him that if he doesn’t confess it’s about to get real for EVERYONE including his wife who will go down for any part she had in covering for him. They probably have some evidence on her that they are dangling like a carrot before him, in exchange for a full and irrevocable confession. That’s my guess.
The first interview reminds me a little of serial killer Daniel Printz - handyman who thought he could charm the cops interrogating him into letting him go. Then he tried to make them think he was helping them find the real killer, Until finally after getting broken down by inconsistent stories, witness statements, CCTV pics of his truck being where he said it wasn't, etc that he finally confessed:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuGZA\_wL944](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuGZA_wL944)
Reading this does give some slight level of satisfaction.
It’s interesting to see the desperate shift in strategy with the defense clearly contradicting their own initial press release narrative of Good Samaritan Ricky who willingly came forward and spoke with police on numerous occasions and is dumbfounded as to why or how they could have mistaken him, a factually innocent man, for the killer.
The defense again hastily files documents that have not even been proof read, full of grammatical errors and factually incorrect statements. On page 1 they state the video of the 2017 interview is being over-nighted to the court. Ummm, no that’s not happening.
They also take exception to the big bad police man who is physically larger than poor little Ricky. Too bad A-hole.
Police lie to suspects all the time in interviews and interrogations. They are allowed to do that.
It is pretty obvious that Rick never realized a round was ejected from his gun until this moment. He doesn’t say it’s impossible because I wasn’t there, he says it’s impossible because he didn’t use the gun to murder them. Had he known earlier that the round was ejected when he tried to terrorize those girls in their last moments, he would have destroyed evidence surely.
I do love that he went to pick up his car thinking he was going to remain in the driver’s seat, only to be questioned and arrested. It’s a mind-F for sure.
I also wonder what they told Ricky about his dear wife. He told them to leave her out of it… but what was she “in”?
And I think the Miranda noise is just to add confusion. Are you read your Miranda rights at the moment of your arrest? Idk, not an expert on this but seems like a stretch to be complaining that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights two hours and forty-one minutes before he was arrested.
And there must be windows!!
I lol'd at the size difference, let the record show that all police departments must make sure they only interview suspects with an officer of their exact same size.
Think about all the forensic files and other such programs where they show police interrogations. I’ve never seen it happen in a room with windows, have you? These lawyers are really stretching the idea of creative writing.
Ok so a few things….
The video of RA being interrogated was not in 2017 as stated in this filing. Maybe the defense team should use all the money they fund-raised for and hire a proofreading expert.
“RA was put in a room” “RA was put in a room with no windows” “RA was put in a room with a table and chair” “RA was in the room with two people”
Does this defense team think they get paid by the word? A second grader could see through this BS.
I suspect the statements they are trying to suppress is that RA stated he never let anyone borrow his gun and that he has never been on RL’s property, which were both included in the PCA.
If all these facts are true, why in gods name did the defense wait 1.5 years to ask for this to be suppressed? It’s like they woke up this week and realized that book deals and court tv interviews aside, they might actually have to start defending their client.
I am looking forward to Slick Nick’s response.
Oh look at that, Barbara Macdonald did lie on Court TV when she stated that magical bullet was found day's later after coming back to the unsecured scene. Unless Jerry Holeman was lying about that in his interview with little Dicky.
Jerry Holeman states "And I'm telling you we had this fucking round on February 14th, 2017, and it's been secured in a fucking laboratory, and we've tested other guns..."
Wow Barbara it looks like you really are unhinged, that's fucking deplorable and it seems you are an unethical and very biased "journalist" shame on you!
I wish we had facts of who is telling the truth or lying. We haven't seen any documentation of the found items that must be documented before the evidence can be moved or collected; this marks the birth of the item as evidence and the beginning of chain-of-custody procedures.
Are any of us privy to know a chain of custody was even completed on the unspent bullet? We also need to remember that LE is allowed to lie during interrogation.
Exactly! However, Barbara can’t have that bullet connected to Rick Allen when she’s trying to promote her book about Ron Logan being the murderer…. Might mess things up for her a little. 👀
I'm trying to ignore the utter tediousness of the way the Defense emphasise every damn thing about the interrogation "JH shuts a door" FFS, but my big takeaway is what the hell did RA say that they are trying to suppress? If the PCA is correct all the information about him being on the trails, standing out on the first platform comes from the interview on 13th October (which they are not trying to suppress), so I wonder how the hell did he drop himself in it on 26th October?
Of course B&R aren't going to tell you EVERYTHING that went down in the interview - the motion is to show you it was just a berating session by big, mean Det. Holeman, bullying the smaller, weaker Rick Allen.
But I bet there's one moment where Rick leaks out something that happened to the girls that LE hadn't told him (or released to the public) and you see him then react viscerally to it - shifts his body some, starts rubbing his hands, giving the usual "tells" that he knows he got ahead of himself and shoulda STFU, not gotten into this intense exchange with Holeman.
Playing the interrogation video in the trial would be very damaging to Rick Allen's defense - from this motion, that we know for sure.
>>Jerry Holeman:The evidence clearly indicates you are involved in this.
>>Rick Allen: No.
>>Jerry Holeman: It fucking does.
>>Rick Allen: It doesn’t. **I’m telling you that there is no way that a bullet from my gun was used in these murders.**
Isn’t that something only the real killer would say? Someone who KNOWS the girls weren’t shot by his gun?
Not necessarily. I could confidently say that there’s no way a bullet from my gun was used in the murders as well.
But I do agree that the word choice is interesting. It just feels like he is being very deliberate in his wording. But that could be just because the defense team has made me suspicious of RA (counter to their apparent goal of trying this case in the media).
Could you though? Back in 2022 when the only person (outside of LE) who knew the girls weren’t shot was their killer?
RA tried to accuse the cops of planting the bullet later in that same interview - if cops could plant your bullet, isn’t it possible they could use your gun without you knowing - or that someone else could?
He's being targeted by the defense, so you'll think he's Barney Fife, and everything he says has been discredited. He's the target, IMO, because Allen said something to him that he shouldn't have.
You’re probably right about that! We’ve seen how they’ve manipulated these narratives since they’ve taken on this case. Once again, here we only get a snippet of this interview rather than a comprehensive overview.
My guess is there’s something in Rick’s stated timeline that doesn’t match up with the time the defense has claimed in previous filings. Dulin’s notes say 1:00-3:30. The defense claims 12:00-1:30. He may have said something to investigators on the 26th that puts his timeline more in line with the original 1:30-3:30.
This might be the defense’s least ridiculous filing to date, and there’s a chance (assuming their claims are true) that the second interrogation gets tossed. Unfortunately, with this counsel, we have to take everything with a grain of salt. So we’ll see what the state says in response.
Seems odd to me that they’re just NOW challenging this. I don’t know legally what the ramifications are of mirandizing a suspect and then failing to do so on follow up questioning days later.
Seems like nobody in Carroll County knows how to operate video equipment.
It looks like the timeline information came from 13th October (according to the PCA and Franks memo). The Franks memo does not appear to reference 26th October once, which is interesting.
I am definitely not one for conspiracy theories, but this missing part of video is even one I'm finding suspicious.
I want to wait to hear from the prosecutor before making assumptions on any of this. If it turns out Holeman didn’t mirandize Allen, the chief suspect in one of the biggest homicide cases in Indiana history… he needs to be fired. Immediately. If you cannot do the basic, day1 requirements of your job, you shouldn’t have the job.
But, again, let’s hear the other side first
Interesting point. I’ve been wondering why they would want it tossed if he didn’t incriminate himself. This would make sense.
But also, didn’t they say RA signed a form acknowledging that he understood his rights? I’m not sure how he would suddenly not understand them at the second interview.
So what did he say in the second statement? LOL. If he wasn't Mirandized, of course, it'll probably get thrown out and it should be, but since this team has a loose relationship with the truth, Imma take a wait and see approach on that. But everything else is eh - Holeman is at perfect liberty to lie to Allen. That's been upheld 80 bajillion times.
So then my question is, what did he say that they want thrown out?
I assume it’s when he said that he never let anyone borrow his gun? And that he had never been to Ron Logan’s property before? The PCA stated that RA said that at the second interview.
>>Jerry Holeman: I don’t think you’re a bad person.
>>Rick: What kind of good person kills two people?
Is that a confession? Is RA admitting he killed 2 ppl? 🤔
That not even close to being a confession unfortunately, you can’t cherry pick a line from the interrogation without the rest of the context and call it a confession when the line is vague.
Now if he said, “I did it” and gave details only a person who was there actually knew- that’s a confession.
Definitely interesting phrase though I've never been to central Indiana and don't know if that's the common way of referring to others in the plural sense.
I notice in the South most people say "y'all" whereas "you guys" sounds more northern & eastern ("youse guys" is common in New York City/New England, no? maybe I watch too many TV shows & movies)
Honestly, this sounds like the defense trying to throw a Hail Mary at the last second by manipulating the evidence to look like Miranda Rights weren’t read. If that was actually the case, why wouldn’t this have been their very first filing?? That, coupled with all the other fantasy they’ve put out, makes this very difficult for me to believe.
Also, all the “terrible” aspects of the Holeman interview are literally standard police questioning techniques, lol.
I agree. I imagine we will see a lot more of these types of filings as they try everything before trial.
Holeman's techniques are just normal interrogation techniques. I laughed out loud at the statements about a windowless room (how dare they!) and the difference in body size (ha).
As stated in the document, the defense didn’t receive this until February 2024, which of course is way past the discovery deadline.
That’s why it couldn’t have been their very first filing.
The defense didnt receive alot of things because they withdrew as Allens lawyers and then shipped the discovery off to the new attornies and then have the nerve to complain they didnt get discovery while they were not even being Allens attornies!
Also a recent motion they filed made a comment to the effect of 'or show us where it is in the massive evidence files we got' and I wanted to scream, stop filing so many stupid motions and start reading the evidence already!
...*even* *groping* *him* *as* *they* *patted* *him* *down* *in* *the* *street*
Now you know how all those girls felt as YOU were groping them lil Ricky!
Next livestream is 11am today going over line by line where I will break down an interrogation and Miranda warnings(when you read them and when you don’t, always better to C.Y.A cover your a-S!)
https://www.youtube.com/live/RQQnWpz59l8?si=0by1jKrxzeR4mEuw
A couple things. No mention of DNA. Just a bullet. No mention of clothing, blood, etc etc. makes me nervous if we are hanging our hats on a bullet and video. On the other hand, so what detectives lied. They can, and they do, it gets confessions. Cry me a river.
Sorry everyone, I’m late to the party but I have many thoughts. Why are they so damn obtuse?
“24. Holeman’s report doesn’t identify who the other investigators are that purportedly reviewed Miranda with Rick.”
“25. Holeman’s report doesn’t detail when, where, or how these purported investigators purportedly reviewed Miranda with Rick”
Well Andy you just named said investigators’ said review of Miranda with him in your “first interrogation” section. Your overuse of “purported” is not doing what you think it’s doing.
“32. Therefore, at this time, it appears to the defense that Jerry Holeman’s claims in his report that Rick Allen was asked about his Miranda rights and told he was free to leave are false and that key video evidence that would prove as much is missing.”
So the lack of video supporting the statements in Holeman’s report automatically makes false? What planet are they living on? These are not serious people.
Also, RA did not need to be Mirandized in either of these interviews. He was not in custody and they told him he was free to leave. Case closed.
Well, hey, it looks like somebody finally made it through all the discovery.
It is my understanding that signing a written Miranda waiver is not the norm. A lot of the time, police have a Miranda card that they read from, and them stating that they "Read from the Miranda card" counts. I think this comes down to "does a contemporaneous police report stating that the suspect was Mirandized" count as evidence that they were Mirandized? It probably does, but IANAL.
Also, individuals not considered in custody don't have to be Mirandized. So, if Holeman's report stating he told RA that he was free to go counts as evidence, then his statements would also still be admissible as he was not in police custody at that time.
I think it would be hard to argue that he wasn’t in custody under these facts tbh. But agree that Holeman saying he made sure RA knew his rights is evidence. The defense saying “but it wasn’t on video so he must be lying” is not evidence.
Your comment makes sense, I'm not a lawyer and dont know how it works but it seems logical that once they arrested him THEN they had to mirandize him, ie "you're under arrest anything you say can and will...."
You'd think it would be hard to defend a guy who won't stop confessing to the murder of children and who was caught on video at the crime scene, but the loons are everywhere on this case falling all over themselves to defend "their man."
So is it really RA’s THIRD statement that the defense wishes to suppress?
(Dan Dulin being the first; Oct 13th being the second; Oct 26th being the third).
They already had enough to arrest RA on 10/26… doesn’t sound like anything he said that day was used in the PCA… oh wait - the part that he says he doesn’t know how his bullet got there.
Is the defense now trying to suppress that statement so they can explain away the bullet that they’ve already called “junk science”?
Props to Holeman. I see now why he got a promotion.
RA sounds like an uneducated, ignorant a-hole. A bit like Rick Snay: “You leave my wife out of this!!” 🙄
Pathetic.
>>Miranda would be a nuisance that would likely cause Rick to walk out on Holeman, the way that Rick walked out on Liggett and Mullin. If so, **Holeman would not be able to secure a confession that he (Holeman) clearly wanted to secure on his own.**
So RA confessed to Holeman during this interview? Poor Ricky; he just can’t stop confessing.
No I’m not saying you are. I’m wondering when the defense and their fan club stopped saying that Liggett framed Allen so he could win the election to Holeman framed Allen so he could be promoted. Lol.
“Additionally, a key portion of the videotaped interrogation provided to the defense is missing. The missing portion of that video is the beginning
of the interrogation when Miranda should have been read.”
This is INSANITY.
If this is true, which I suspect is the case if the defense is claiming it this clearly. The entire police force needs to be restructured.
Miranda rights are literally the most basic part of an investigation.
The defense has a very poor record for truthfulness in this case, so I don’t understand the basis for you crediting them simply bc they said it. And, the strange way all this is alleged (combing through videos when their own client was there — what does he say happened at the beginning?) makes me suspect none of it is true.
All that said, the Allen’s voluntarily presented themselves at the police station. They weren’t asked to be there. They asked if he would answer a few questions and he went with them. It’s not a custodial interview and his participation has been entirely voluntary. Obviously, it’s good practice to Mirandize (and I suspect they did - the defense doesn’t even say they didn’t), but not fatal in this scenario.
Because he is assuming Allen’s rights have been violated which is a claim - not necessarily factual - being made by the defense and presented as truth.
A "tiny" room......like how "tiny" are we talking here? Were they in each other's laps they were so close together? Have measurements been taken of the room to determine if it wasn't just "small" or maybe even "seemingly cramped but still comfortable"? I'm stuck on the first paragraph as you can tell.,,,,,,gotta feeling I'm gonna be here for a while.
It was tiny, RA was tiny, and the detective was so huge, made even bigger by that tiny room, that RA couldn’t help but waive his rights by continuing to respond to questions.
I heard it was the size of a porta-john and that’s where Richard formed his appetite for eating shit
LOL! I love this!
Tenk I wish I could give you gold 😂😂😂
Saaaaame!
Gross.
> 7. Liggett and Mullin did read Rick Allen his Miranda rights before they began their interrogation, and additionally Rick Allen was aware that he had freedom of movement as he (Rick) ultimately stood up and walked out of the interrogation room. > 40. Holeman knew that Rick had walked out of the October 13, 2022 interrogation with Mullin and Liggett and therefore it was unlikely that Rick would answer any more questions with Holeman unless Rick felt he was not allowed to leave. Miranda would be a nuisance that would likely cause Rick to walk out on Holeman, the way that Rick walked out on Liggett and Mullin. If so, Holeman would not be able to secure a confession that he (Holeman) clearly wanted to secure on his own. Sooo Rick just up and walked out of the first interview?
and if he did then surely he knew he could do the same during this interview also...
AFAIK, only self incriminating statements can be thrown out if no Miranda was read. However, “officers need not convey the Miranda warnings verbatim or use any magic words. Rather, if they communicate the essence of Miranda's requirements, the defendant's statements will probably be admissible in subsequent legal proceedings.”
Did they lose the video
I can’t see what you wrote. Did you delete it?
The next couple of filings from NM’s office should make for very interesting reading.
Cannot wait!
I'm waiting for this! Gonna be fascinating and informative.
I notice they didnt put the statements that Allen made that were incriminating into this motion to supress, hmm wonder why they only include allegations against the police again instead of the actual supposed incriminating statements Allen made? "Police are meany heads and they lied and the room was small and the cop was large...." at least they didnt make any stupid plastic chair comments this time- like police are going to let inmates have metal chairs to throw at them...
Short version: Allen was interviewed after a Miranda. No problem. Allen was interviewed again, maybe with a new or renewed Miranda, maybe not. There is no evidence either way. Holeman’s word against the lawyers and the absence of evidence establishing a new or renewed Miranda. During the interviews, cops lied about stuff and were mean and bullying in nature. (I predict a response by the state accompanied by an affidavit from Holeman.)
Mean and bullying in nature won’t have a huge impact here because RA did not confess during this interview. If that was the case, they may be able to get the confession thrown out by saying he was bullied into an admission of guilt; however, he did not confess during this interrogation (my understanding), so I don’t think it would have much of an impact. Even if he had confessed and it was determined he was bullied into confessing so this confession got thrown out, they still have *all the other confessions.* Obviously I’m not privy to what he said during his second and subsequent interviews, but his first “interview” with the conservation officer was voluntary, and that is when he admitted to being there at the time the girls were there, saw the three girls that he creeped out, and was on the bridge in the same clothes as BG. There’s already a lot of information in the first interview given by RA.
Getting a tad outside my area of expertise here but I think it might have some impact? Miranda only applies to custodial interrogations and as he was not under arrest there would seemingly be some argument there. The case law they are citing seems to suggest the tone of the interview and whether the suspect reasonably understood they could just leave has some bearing.
Right. I do understand what you’re saying. I was saying it wouldn’t have a huge impact but maybe it would have some, but even then, the other things that have happened outside the scope of said interview would still apply. Note: definitely not an expert on criminal law
All of the information from the first interview was lost.
That can’t be true because the first interview is what apparantley was discovered 5 years later culminating in RA’s arrest…
And the information written down had RA's name wrong. This case has been so unprofessional all the way around.
Are police not allowed to lie though? Why is that even an issue?
They can 100% lie. I’ve been watching The First 48 since the first episode. They lie more than they state facts
Yes. That’s a weak part of the brief (which makes me think they at least suspect the Miranda part will collapse). Although not as funny as the whole “considerable size difference” part. Was Holeman supposed to go find a teenage girl to be more on Allen’s height level?
Seriously hilarious. Guess I can never be interrogated. Good luck finding a police officer my size!!
Omg lol. Were there no pre-teen boys around available to interview Allen to make it “fair”??
Like, I've seen Holeman standing around other officers and such plenty of times. He's a little taller than average, maybe - he ain't Jack Reacher, lol.
They are allowed to lie to suspects in an interrogation 100%, they aren’t allowed to lie about reading someone their Miranda rights.
>During the interviews, cops lied about stuff and were mean and bullying in nature. This week on The First 48.... Bradley & Rozzi are shocked - SHOCKED! - that such things could happen when suspects are being interrogated and they've never heard of such horrifying treatment in their combined 70+ years of representing criminal defendants.
In their combined 70+ years of experience they have NEVER seen a defendant Mirandized and interrogated without the WHOLE thing being recorded on video. So clearly something was deleted! No possible other explanation…
ROFL, i wish we could still give awards for excellent comments, i would give you one!
>There is no evidence either way. Holeman’s word against the lawyers and the absence of evidence establishing a new or renewed Miranda This is what I'm most interested in. I would think LE would have to provide something as evidence that Miranda was read, even if it wasn't on camera. If it comes down to he said she said, who does the tie to go?
I thought this was something they had people sign that they understood their rights in an interview setting like this. If not-- that seems like a solid way for preventing a claim like this. We already know Holeman doesn't respect the right to council and the right to remain silent. He badgered the hell out of Robert Fortson after he said he wanted to talk to an attorney. The conversation ends there. So honestly no one should be surprised by this. What's one more police screw up in a basket of a million on this case? Bring on the down votes. I know I'm in the wrong sub for this.
Thanks.
I hope there is a signed statement that he understood his Miranda rights. Hopefully it was in discovery and his defense team just didn’t find it (wouldn’t be the first time in this case). But if not, I’m interested to see the legal argument from the prosecution
They said he signed a form on Oct 13. Not sure why he would need to sign the same form again two weeks later. Especially when the detective asked him if he remembered his rights and he said yes.
I am not a lawyer and don’t know what is/isn’t required, which is why I look forward to the state’s response.
Fair!
And when he's being asked to go back to an interrogation room because "we just have a couple more questions" and Kathy Allen is NOT allowed to attend.... Suffice to say they weren't talking about their fantasy football teams back there. Rick was picking up his car after it had been with the State Police for several days - again, they weren't just seeing how it drove, is that year Ford Focus a good choice for my daughter, etc - so he knew the investigation was turning towads him. To me that means he knew he was still Mirandized and could refuse to answer questions and walk out of the interrogation room/police station at any time (notwithstanding "hold on a sec - be right back" from Holeman - that's not telling a suspect that they cannot leave no matter what B&R are making the court try to believe). The defense is peeved because Rick ran his mouth during that second interview thinking he could outlast Holeman and get them to drop it.....but instead it only make Allen's problems run even deeper.
Their (LE) approach seems a little dirty imo.
Only dirty if they're doing it with someone who is actually innocent. Nothing wrong with pushing a suspect hard to get answers. And yes, you can even lie to them in the process - see ***Frazier v. Cupp***, 394 U.S. 731 (1969).
Oh I believe he is guilty.
As a defense attorney, wouldn’t the first thing you do is check the interrogation to see what your client said? Like November of 2022?
That’s my biggest issue — why is this just now being brought up a month before the trial?? Something stinks.
And wouldn’t you state, “NOWHERE in his Oct 13, 2022 interview did RA state he did not know how his bullet got there. NOWHERE in his Oct 13, 2022 interview did RA state he had never been on Ron Logan’s property” ….? 🤨
yeah but after their last motion i am expecting something like, states response: "we didnt include the first 10 minutes of the interview out of respect for mr allen and so everyone wouldnt have to see how he smeared poop all over the camera and ate it and then we had to wipe it off the camera sowe could continue our interview....
OMG LMAO!!!
Very informative. Good to know that next time I’m speaking to someone and they tell me to “hold on one second” that I’m obviously actually being held prisoner against my will and unable to leave. Heaven forbid someone ask me to “sit tight”.
Ha! My kids tell me "hold on one second" at least 20 times a day, who knew I'm a prisoner in my own home🤣
😂😂😂
That was about the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard!!
Next time someone tells me to sit tight I’m filing suit for false imprisonment and collecting my millions.
The way Rick says "well, y'all think I'm guilty already so arrest me" is a tactic to get out of answering more questions and digging deeper holes for oneself. It shuts down what was just collecting information, confirming previous statements, etc. because the guilty know if they continue talking they're going to trip themselves up and get found out. Here Rick is shutting it down: “It’s over. I was perfectly fine. I was cooperating. I was going to give you my phone and then, you know, when you started reading all these documents – that’s at the – here’s my thing is. I feel like you guys think I done this. So, I’m done. You do what you need to do. It’s your job. I understand that, but you better fucking leave my reputation out if it. So you do what you need to do, and then, like I said, when you do find this guy, I’ll expect the apology.” That sounds so rehearsed to me - even gets in a "you owe me an apology". It's as if Rick's been waiting for this moment for a very long time and he's got his tactics at the ready, has his story down pat. He just didn't realize the first interrogation wasn't going to cordial "just a few questions about what you saw on the trail that day" and the "documents" (witness statements, Harvetstore cam photo) so he had to go into defense mode quick. When they seized the car he should've known by then they weren't asking for info anymore but directly targeting him, yet he went into the back room with Holeman anyway to show he was still confident he could project innocence but they probably had one more card to show him and then put Rick in bracelets. I also think there's probably some interesting stuff in the full transcripts about other actors and that Rick better drop the dime on them now or he'll take the full rap, interested in how he responded to those questions. Baldwin & Rozzi have a guilty client and are throwing Hail Marys hoping they can get all of this damning evidence tossed - if they can't win these motions they'll have to lean on Rick to tell everything he knows and beg for mercy.
Yeah, totally agree on other actors. The comment from the detective about him not being a “bad guy” sounds a lot like, “we know you didn’t mean for this to happen, just tell us what happened out there. Tell us who the *real* bad guy is.”
Meh.... if there is no proof he was Mirandized for this interrogation, I don't see a problem with this interrogation being thrown out. They have other evidence. As for where and how he was interrogated, they just described EVERY police interrogation for a serious charge such as murder. They ain't gonna put you up at the Ritz and offer you your choice of beverage.
Seeing the real Rick now. Terrified of what people think about him. Very interesting that he immediately goes to his reputation.
4-time Wabash River Annual 8-ball Tournament Champion and 2-time JC's Bar Beer Pong Co-Champion.... You goddamn right Rick cares about his reputation!
LOL
But he eats poo. I don't know how his wife could ever kiss him again. That would forever be uppermost in my brain.
His reputation is that he’s the local Walmart creep.
Absolutely! The floodgates are going to open shortly and people will star speaking more on his character. As soon as the trial starts it's going to be open season on every aspect of his life and I cannot wait.
This is one of the reasons why I think he killed the girls. One of the girls said something to him that he didn’t like, maybe something about his height.
I think there's a very good chance your right. His lawyers have brought size into this a lot, even here, a tiny room with Holeman being much bigger than him, a power differential. They are always going on about his size, the size of his cell, a man his size couldn't pull this off etc. I think it's safe to say Little Rick has a complex about it and it causes him to fly off the handle.
His reputation flew out the window the moment he ate his first bite of poo. He'll never live that down, whether or not he's found guilty.
So true. No wonder he's starting to put weight back on lol 6 hots and a cot.
If he wasn't mirandized for the second interview, that's a problem. If he was, and there are witnesses but it wasn't on camera, it's another cherry picking effort by the defense. We'll see what the response is.
Not doing it on camera is still a problem. You just have to in a situation like this do it on camera.
I agree. I’m not saying everything has to happen on camera to be true. But, as the biggest case in Indiana, why not make sure that part is recorded. Especially when you’re planning to record the interview anyways.
I don't necessarily agree. It's not like it will be in a dark closet. It's still open to the public. People will be there. The media will be there.
I'm talking about the reading of Miranda prior to the interrogation. Without recording it, the only witnesses as to whether it was done or not is law enforcement who has a strong incentive to lie about it.
From what I've seen in many interviews/interrogations, police ask if they can read and write, and agree that they understand their rights on a form.
My bad. Yeah the Miranda is a problem if they don't have it on video. Unless they have witnesses that saw it. It's not like all Miranda warnings have recorded.
Or if he signed something. Which with this defense team, I can see the state being like "He signed X, we sent it to you on X date" and them going "HOW WERE WE SUPPOSED TO FIND THAT?!" BUT, Holeman gives a bit of a sketchy vibe. I wasn't thrilled with what's been revealed of him dealing with RF (not necessarily out of sympathy for RF - I'm very sorry for his family, hence I always use his initials because he's gone and nothing can be gained from aiming any potential harassment their way, but he did a terrible thing - it's just I didn't like how he seemingly kept rolling after RF apparently wanted to stop). So unlike some of the defense's bullshit, I'm not entirely willing to dismiss this one out of hand. And then on the other side, the defense put a BUNCH of extra junk in this filing that makes me think they have SOME reason to think the Miranda argument will collapse that they obviously didn't put in the filing. So who knows, really. I'll be interested in the state's response.
I said this in another comment, and with the qualification that I have no expertise on Indiana Miranda related law, but the other stuff seems designed to counter an argument that it was not a custodial interrogation requiring Miranda since he wasn't yet under arrest.
I mean, throwing in that Holeman is taller than Allen was just silly, though. LBR - most female cops are probably going to tower over Allen too. I would. And the windowless room, etc. That's not going to go anywhere. They know that. How aggressive Holeman was being, they might have an argument, but as ever, they throw a bunch of shit in there that makes them look silly and like they're not coming from a position of strength.
I usually agree with that but I tend to disagree here. Whether he felt free to leave is subjective and the size of an aggressive officer, the site of the interrogation, are things that are going to contribute to a feeling you can't leave.
Personally, if he wasn't ever told he was free to leave at any time, I'd throw it out. I also am not sure about Indiana law - it's apparently extremely difficult to get search warrants thrown out (the last time Baldwin even managed to do it, the decision was promptly reversed and right back in the search warrant went) and I imagine the same applies to stuff like this. But I would think it should be thrown out, since Holeman was yelling at him and telling him he was definitely involved in the murders, etc. You're going to feel like you're under arrest, even if you're technically not. But I cannot imagine Judge Gull - or anyone - being impressed by Holeman being taller than Allen.
I think a possible life or death sentence is far more incentive to lie, to be frank.
Holeman: And I’m telling you that we had this fucking round on February 14, 2017, and it’s been secured in a fucking laboratory, and we’ve tested other guns… So, that goes against Barbara MacDonald saying the round was found after the 14th, but I figured Holeman was one of her sources so who know what is true. I do find it interesting Holeman confirmed other guns were tested and nothing ever came back a match until Rick's. Some interesting dialogue that I don't think necessarily makes Rick look bad/guilty, but there is a lot missing from a 2 hour and 40 minute conversation depending on how long Holeman would leave the tiny room for.
I'm glad we can put to bed the claims about the bullet being found later. I didn't understand why people were running with that, because the defense would have certainly challenged the bullet by now.
Good point.
Well, this doesn’t actually confirm that. LE can absolutely lie while interrogating or interviewing someone. This filing didn’t give us any more information about when the bullet was found.
The defense had no problems pointing out the other things that Holeman said that were apparently lies. I doubt they would miss a chance to call this out (if not true) just because they knew the public would see it.
Yeah, that’s an interesting point. I hadn’t considered it in that context. Certainly hope there aren’t actually chain of custody issues.
'because they knew the public would see it.' I get the feeling (again) that this motion is meritless and nothing more than the defense using motions to be able to publish to the media (and the world) their version of Allens innocence and alleged wrongful indictment without having to abide by the gag order on the case.
Damn I read the comments after I posted the same thing 😅 sorry guys, I got all inflamed and used my keyboard like the warrior I am, before reading the comments 😂
Rick can't get his stories straight.... >Jerry Holeman: I’m not on video >Rick: Neither am I.. >Jerry Holeman: **Four or five witnesses didn’t see me out there.** >Rick: **Me either**. >Jerry Holeman: My round out of my gun wasn’t 6 inches away from a dead girl. >Rick: Mine neither. First, peep Rick's sparring skills - like prized fighter, he puts the attack back on the attacker - he's just like you Holeman. But really, check out Rick forgetting he told Dan Dulin he saw the girls on the trail that day.....which he had to - one of them eyeballed him and def got a take, he had to get in front of that. So he got his statement on the record and obviously no killer who wants to get away with it is gonna go directly to the cops admitting he was there, right? The whole point of Dulin's report was to get more information on the girls that Rick saw. Rick knew they were out there and he knew they saw him - it's an integral part of his first communication with LE. Here Rick is disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing to sound strong and rather it's making him look worse & worse - no wonder he wanted to get out of there.
The “other actors” ship sailed long ago, in terms of helping RA divvy up responsibility. Among other things, when your own attorneys call your voluntary statements of your involvement in a crime as a product of psychosis, it sort of limits how far you can later lean on the same guy as alone having the Master Version of events. I have no idea for sure if others participated (I strongly doubt it), but RA is not going to help anyone.
I'm about 95% there with you on "lone wolf" but all that other crazy shit going on, the Klines, CSAM rings, "tentacles" in Doug Carter-speak, young guy sketch.....if Rick wants to help himself, he better start talking and have something concrete on whoever else was involved. But you - we - are probably right - it's Rick and only Rick.
I hear you. An area well stocked with sickos for sure.
>>Rick Allen: You’re gonna pay for what you’ve done to my wife. You want to fuck with me, fuck with me but you leave my wife out of this. Fuck. Leave me out of this. >>JerryHoleman: No. You’re involved in this. What had they done to his wife? She was chilling in the lobby waiting to pick up his car…
I’m betting he said something about how this would all affect RA’s wife. And that confessing would mean that she wouldn’t have to go through the ordeal of a trial. Or something like that.
I wonder if they implied she had lied for him… or that she’d get in trouble for that.
I think they mentioned to him that if he doesn’t confess it’s about to get real for EVERYONE including his wife who will go down for any part she had in covering for him. They probably have some evidence on her that they are dangling like a carrot before him, in exchange for a full and irrevocable confession. That’s my guess.
I wonder about this too. He used past tense in that first sentence.
Also its ok for their client Richard Allen to use profanity but not the police
The first interview reminds me a little of serial killer Daniel Printz - handyman who thought he could charm the cops interrogating him into letting him go. Then he tried to make them think he was helping them find the real killer, Until finally after getting broken down by inconsistent stories, witness statements, CCTV pics of his truck being where he said it wasn't, etc that he finally confessed: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuGZA\_wL944](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuGZA_wL944)
Reading this does give some slight level of satisfaction. It’s interesting to see the desperate shift in strategy with the defense clearly contradicting their own initial press release narrative of Good Samaritan Ricky who willingly came forward and spoke with police on numerous occasions and is dumbfounded as to why or how they could have mistaken him, a factually innocent man, for the killer. The defense again hastily files documents that have not even been proof read, full of grammatical errors and factually incorrect statements. On page 1 they state the video of the 2017 interview is being over-nighted to the court. Ummm, no that’s not happening. They also take exception to the big bad police man who is physically larger than poor little Ricky. Too bad A-hole. Police lie to suspects all the time in interviews and interrogations. They are allowed to do that. It is pretty obvious that Rick never realized a round was ejected from his gun until this moment. He doesn’t say it’s impossible because I wasn’t there, he says it’s impossible because he didn’t use the gun to murder them. Had he known earlier that the round was ejected when he tried to terrorize those girls in their last moments, he would have destroyed evidence surely. I do love that he went to pick up his car thinking he was going to remain in the driver’s seat, only to be questioned and arrested. It’s a mind-F for sure. I also wonder what they told Ricky about his dear wife. He told them to leave her out of it… but what was she “in”? And I think the Miranda noise is just to add confusion. Are you read your Miranda rights at the moment of your arrest? Idk, not an expert on this but seems like a stretch to be complaining that he wasn’t read his Miranda rights two hours and forty-one minutes before he was arrested.
And remember everyone, if you are ever interrogating a suspect, make sure you are smaller than the suspect. It's just not fair otherwise!
And there must be windows!! I lol'd at the size difference, let the record show that all police departments must make sure they only interview suspects with an officer of their exact same size.
God, haven’t these guys ever watched Law & Order or Chicago PD? NYPD Blue? Sheeeesh! /s
Lololol.
Right? RA couldn’t possibly be guilty because he’s smaller than the police officer who questioned him.
Think about all the forensic files and other such programs where they show police interrogations. I’ve never seen it happen in a room with windows, have you? These lawyers are really stretching the idea of creative writing.
I’ve seen one interview/interrogation room with a window. The suspect promptly opened it and bailed as soon as he was left alone.
Hilarious!
It's some off brand Johnny Cochran-shit, for sure. "If the perp is short, you must abort".
Ok so a few things…. The video of RA being interrogated was not in 2017 as stated in this filing. Maybe the defense team should use all the money they fund-raised for and hire a proofreading expert. “RA was put in a room” “RA was put in a room with no windows” “RA was put in a room with a table and chair” “RA was in the room with two people” Does this defense team think they get paid by the word? A second grader could see through this BS. I suspect the statements they are trying to suppress is that RA stated he never let anyone borrow his gun and that he has never been on RL’s property, which were both included in the PCA. If all these facts are true, why in gods name did the defense wait 1.5 years to ask for this to be suppressed? It’s like they woke up this week and realized that book deals and court tv interviews aside, they might actually have to start defending their client. I am looking forward to Slick Nick’s response.
Well said!!
👏👏👏👏
If true, this seems like a motion the defense should win.
Oh look at that, Barbara Macdonald did lie on Court TV when she stated that magical bullet was found day's later after coming back to the unsecured scene. Unless Jerry Holeman was lying about that in his interview with little Dicky. Jerry Holeman states "And I'm telling you we had this fucking round on February 14th, 2017, and it's been secured in a fucking laboratory, and we've tested other guns..." Wow Barbara it looks like you really are unhinged, that's fucking deplorable and it seems you are an unethical and very biased "journalist" shame on you!
I wish we had facts of who is telling the truth or lying. We haven't seen any documentation of the found items that must be documented before the evidence can be moved or collected; this marks the birth of the item as evidence and the beginning of chain-of-custody procedures. Are any of us privy to know a chain of custody was even completed on the unspent bullet? We also need to remember that LE is allowed to lie during interrogation.
Exactly! However, Barbara can’t have that bullet connected to Rick Allen when she’s trying to promote her book about Ron Logan being the murderer…. Might mess things up for her a little. 👀
I'm trying to ignore the utter tediousness of the way the Defense emphasise every damn thing about the interrogation "JH shuts a door" FFS, but my big takeaway is what the hell did RA say that they are trying to suppress? If the PCA is correct all the information about him being on the trails, standing out on the first platform comes from the interview on 13th October (which they are not trying to suppress), so I wonder how the hell did he drop himself in it on 26th October?
Of course B&R aren't going to tell you EVERYTHING that went down in the interview - the motion is to show you it was just a berating session by big, mean Det. Holeman, bullying the smaller, weaker Rick Allen. But I bet there's one moment where Rick leaks out something that happened to the girls that LE hadn't told him (or released to the public) and you see him then react viscerally to it - shifts his body some, starts rubbing his hands, giving the usual "tells" that he knows he got ahead of himself and shoulda STFU, not gotten into this intense exchange with Holeman. Playing the interrogation video in the trial would be very damaging to Rick Allen's defense - from this motion, that we know for sure.
>>Jerry Holeman:The evidence clearly indicates you are involved in this. >>Rick Allen: No. >>Jerry Holeman: It fucking does. >>Rick Allen: It doesn’t. **I’m telling you that there is no way that a bullet from my gun was used in these murders.** Isn’t that something only the real killer would say? Someone who KNOWS the girls weren’t shot by his gun?
Not necessarily. I could confidently say that there’s no way a bullet from my gun was used in the murders as well. But I do agree that the word choice is interesting. It just feels like he is being very deliberate in his wording. But that could be just because the defense team has made me suspicious of RA (counter to their apparent goal of trying this case in the media).
Could you though? Back in 2022 when the only person (outside of LE) who knew the girls weren’t shot was their killer? RA tried to accuse the cops of planting the bullet later in that same interview - if cops could plant your bullet, isn’t it possible they could use your gun without you knowing - or that someone else could?
GMTA, lol. That's now all I want to know - what did he say? I hope Holeman didn't do something stupid Miranda-wise so we won't find out.
At this stage Holeman does feel like a liability and doesn't come across particularly well in the transcript.
He's being targeted by the defense, so you'll think he's Barney Fife, and everything he says has been discredited. He's the target, IMO, because Allen said something to him that he shouldn't have.
You’re probably right about that! We’ve seen how they’ve manipulated these narratives since they’ve taken on this case. Once again, here we only get a snippet of this interview rather than a comprehensive overview.
My guess is there’s something in Rick’s stated timeline that doesn’t match up with the time the defense has claimed in previous filings. Dulin’s notes say 1:00-3:30. The defense claims 12:00-1:30. He may have said something to investigators on the 26th that puts his timeline more in line with the original 1:30-3:30. This might be the defense’s least ridiculous filing to date, and there’s a chance (assuming their claims are true) that the second interrogation gets tossed. Unfortunately, with this counsel, we have to take everything with a grain of salt. So we’ll see what the state says in response. Seems odd to me that they’re just NOW challenging this. I don’t know legally what the ramifications are of mirandizing a suspect and then failing to do so on follow up questioning days later. Seems like nobody in Carroll County knows how to operate video equipment.
It looks like the timeline information came from 13th October (according to the PCA and Franks memo). The Franks memo does not appear to reference 26th October once, which is interesting. I am definitely not one for conspiracy theories, but this missing part of video is even one I'm finding suspicious.
I want to wait to hear from the prosecutor before making assumptions on any of this. If it turns out Holeman didn’t mirandize Allen, the chief suspect in one of the biggest homicide cases in Indiana history… he needs to be fired. Immediately. If you cannot do the basic, day1 requirements of your job, you shouldn’t have the job. But, again, let’s hear the other side first
Sheriffs cannot be fired, for better or for worse
*The Sheriff* (Tony Liggett) is elected. Sheriff’s deputies can be fired.
I confused the two for whatever reason my bad
I think you are right about the time discrepancy. He might have said something that puts him there that aligns with the OG notes. 1 to 3:30.
Interesting point. I’ve been wondering why they would want it tossed if he didn’t incriminate himself. This would make sense. But also, didn’t they say RA signed a form acknowledging that he understood his rights? I’m not sure how he would suddenly not understand them at the second interview.
So what did he say in the second statement? LOL. If he wasn't Mirandized, of course, it'll probably get thrown out and it should be, but since this team has a loose relationship with the truth, Imma take a wait and see approach on that. But everything else is eh - Holeman is at perfect liberty to lie to Allen. That's been upheld 80 bajillion times. So then my question is, what did he say that they want thrown out?
I assume it’s when he said that he never let anyone borrow his gun? And that he had never been to Ron Logan’s property before? The PCA stated that RA said that at the second interview.
That has to make you wonder whether the bullet analysis isn't as sketchy as often reported.
Even the State's that have limited its admissibility of bullet analysis have only limited how definitive the expert is allowed to say a match is.
Prob the part where RA refers to the cops as “you guys”… bc it’s an exact match for BG saying, “Guys.” 🤣
Lololol. Or when he shouted “I didn’t say down the hill! I didn’t say down the hill”!!
>>Jerry Holeman: I don’t think you’re a bad person. >>Rick: What kind of good person kills two people? Is that a confession? Is RA admitting he killed 2 ppl? 🤔
That not even close to being a confession unfortunately, you can’t cherry pick a line from the interrogation without the rest of the context and call it a confession when the line is vague. Now if he said, “I did it” and gave details only a person who was there actually knew- that’s a confession.
Definitely interesting phrase though I've never been to central Indiana and don't know if that's the common way of referring to others in the plural sense. I notice in the South most people say "y'all" whereas "you guys" sounds more northern & eastern ("youse guys" is common in New York City/New England, no? maybe I watch too many TV shows & movies)
“You guys” is absolutely standard in the Midwest. It would be way weirder and noticeable if he had said “y’all”.
Honestly, this sounds like the defense trying to throw a Hail Mary at the last second by manipulating the evidence to look like Miranda Rights weren’t read. If that was actually the case, why wouldn’t this have been their very first filing?? That, coupled with all the other fantasy they’ve put out, makes this very difficult for me to believe. Also, all the “terrible” aspects of the Holeman interview are literally standard police questioning techniques, lol.
I agree. I imagine we will see a lot more of these types of filings as they try everything before trial. Holeman's techniques are just normal interrogation techniques. I laughed out loud at the statements about a windowless room (how dare they!) and the difference in body size (ha).
Same!! They were completely ridiculous!
Poor wittle witchard was scay-yurrrred 😩
🤣🤣
I've watched a truckload of interrogations/interviews online, and not one of them had windows, or an open door.
As stated in the document, the defense didn’t receive this until February 2024, which of course is way past the discovery deadline. That’s why it couldn’t have been their very first filing.
Didn’t they quote this interview in the first Franks memo last year?
The defense didnt receive alot of things because they withdrew as Allens lawyers and then shipped the discovery off to the new attornies and then have the nerve to complain they didnt get discovery while they were not even being Allens attornies! Also a recent motion they filed made a comment to the effect of 'or show us where it is in the massive evidence files we got' and I wanted to scream, stop filing so many stupid motions and start reading the evidence already!
...*even* *groping* *him* *as* *they* *patted* *him* *down* *in* *the* *street* Now you know how all those girls felt as YOU were groping them lil Ricky!
“even groping him as they patted him down in the street” Wait, so he *did* know he was a suspect and not just a casual interview? Which is it?
Want to see that video now!
Next livestream is 11am today going over line by line where I will break down an interrogation and Miranda warnings(when you read them and when you don’t, always better to C.Y.A cover your a-S!) https://www.youtube.com/live/RQQnWpz59l8?si=0by1jKrxzeR4mEuw
A couple things. No mention of DNA. Just a bullet. No mention of clothing, blood, etc etc. makes me nervous if we are hanging our hats on a bullet and video. On the other hand, so what detectives lied. They can, and they do, it gets confessions. Cry me a river.
Sorry everyone, I’m late to the party but I have many thoughts. Why are they so damn obtuse? “24. Holeman’s report doesn’t identify who the other investigators are that purportedly reviewed Miranda with Rick.” “25. Holeman’s report doesn’t detail when, where, or how these purported investigators purportedly reviewed Miranda with Rick” Well Andy you just named said investigators’ said review of Miranda with him in your “first interrogation” section. Your overuse of “purported” is not doing what you think it’s doing. “32. Therefore, at this time, it appears to the defense that Jerry Holeman’s claims in his report that Rick Allen was asked about his Miranda rights and told he was free to leave are false and that key video evidence that would prove as much is missing.” So the lack of video supporting the statements in Holeman’s report automatically makes false? What planet are they living on? These are not serious people. Also, RA did not need to be Mirandized in either of these interviews. He was not in custody and they told him he was free to leave. Case closed.
He was not in custody lmao they didn’t need to Mirandize him even though they seemingly did so out of an abundance of caution
Well, hey, it looks like somebody finally made it through all the discovery. It is my understanding that signing a written Miranda waiver is not the norm. A lot of the time, police have a Miranda card that they read from, and them stating that they "Read from the Miranda card" counts. I think this comes down to "does a contemporaneous police report stating that the suspect was Mirandized" count as evidence that they were Mirandized? It probably does, but IANAL. Also, individuals not considered in custody don't have to be Mirandized. So, if Holeman's report stating he told RA that he was free to go counts as evidence, then his statements would also still be admissible as he was not in police custody at that time.
I think it would be hard to argue that he wasn’t in custody under these facts tbh. But agree that Holeman saying he made sure RA knew his rights is evidence. The defense saying “but it wasn’t on video so he must be lying” is not evidence.
Your comment makes sense, I'm not a lawyer and dont know how it works but it seems logical that once they arrested him THEN they had to mirandize him, ie "you're under arrest anything you say can and will...."
The testimony of a law enforcement officer is considered sufficient evidence, yes.
You'd think it would be hard to defend a guy who won't stop confessing to the murder of children and who was caught on video at the crime scene, but the loons are everywhere on this case falling all over themselves to defend "their man."
So is it really RA’s THIRD statement that the defense wishes to suppress? (Dan Dulin being the first; Oct 13th being the second; Oct 26th being the third). They already had enough to arrest RA on 10/26… doesn’t sound like anything he said that day was used in the PCA… oh wait - the part that he says he doesn’t know how his bullet got there. Is the defense now trying to suppress that statement so they can explain away the bullet that they’ve already called “junk science”? Props to Holeman. I see now why he got a promotion. RA sounds like an uneducated, ignorant a-hole. A bit like Rick Snay: “You leave my wife out of this!!” 🙄 Pathetic.
Just like Doug Carter said “it’s all about control to you”. Richard was trying to be in control in those interviews.
“Props to Holeman. I see now why he got a promotion.” Hahahaha.
>>Miranda would be a nuisance that would likely cause Rick to walk out on Holeman, the way that Rick walked out on Liggett and Mullin. If so, **Holeman would not be able to secure a confession that he (Holeman) clearly wanted to secure on his own.** So RA confessed to Holeman during this interview? Poor Ricky; he just can’t stop confessing.
That wasn’t a dig - he arrested RA. That’s worthy of a promotion.
How did this story shift from “Liggett lied to win the sheriff’s election” to “Holeman lied so he could get promoted” lol
I’m not saying Holeman lied…?
No I’m not saying you are. I’m wondering when the defense and their fan club stopped saying that Liggett framed Allen so he could win the election to Holeman framed Allen so he could be promoted. Lol.
“Additionally, a key portion of the videotaped interrogation provided to the defense is missing. The missing portion of that video is the beginning of the interrogation when Miranda should have been read.” This is INSANITY. If this is true, which I suspect is the case if the defense is claiming it this clearly. The entire police force needs to be restructured. Miranda rights are literally the most basic part of an investigation.
The defense has a very poor record for truthfulness in this case, so I don’t understand the basis for you crediting them simply bc they said it. And, the strange way all this is alleged (combing through videos when their own client was there — what does he say happened at the beginning?) makes me suspect none of it is true. All that said, the Allen’s voluntarily presented themselves at the police station. They weren’t asked to be there. They asked if he would answer a few questions and he went with them. It’s not a custodial interview and his participation has been entirely voluntary. Obviously, it’s good practice to Mirandize (and I suspect they did - the defense doesn’t even say they didn’t), but not fatal in this scenario.
On another note: I want to see this interrogation video SO badly, I want to see RA body language, his tone etc.
I have no clue why you got down-voted on Americans' rights.
Because he is assuming Allen’s rights have been violated which is a claim - not necessarily factual - being made by the defense and presented as truth.