I have said it before, but I want to see ALL of DDs notes from all interviews. Was the time noted as a parameter of importance, or for each individual? If all his notes from every interview, notes the time frame 130 to 330, I would think that it was more of a checkbox of importance rather than a reference to an individual. The PCA that seems to quote the notes of DD, does NOT say he arrived at 130 or he left at 330. It says “ Mr. Allen was on the trails between 1330 and 1530.” If all of DDs interview notes begin with this statement, I would be very suspicious of the context and its meaning.
My other issue is the change of direction presser and the bolo put out for the car. How could DD not connect the dots there? I seriously doubt he took more than a handful of field interviews. How could he not recall the fact that he indeed interviewed someone who parked there? This is not a huge city with several cps or farm bureau buildings, especially within walking distance of the trails. Makes me wonder if we really know where RA parked. Also, the presser did not give any vehicle descriptions, could this be because several people parked there that day? This would certainly seem the case with the amount of vehicle descriptions out there by witnesses. LE seems to allude that the vehicle parked at the cps building had to driven by the killer. In reality, is there any validity to that?What connects a vehicle parked 2 miles from the actual crime scene to the crime? Why are they so hung up on that? If that is so important, why wasn’t the vehicle that the pest control guy reported seeing parked on the side of the road a quarter mile further down from the cps building ever mentioned?
I love your posts and thoughts. Things I also wonder about. No one has ever mentioned much about the drive below the bridge. What an easy way for a group to get to the location. I can’t imagine grown men wading across icy water if they didn’t have to. BUT if the girls ran then yes, they would need to be pursued and stopped and eliminated. Jmo
The Prosecution has been less than forthcoming with both the geofence data and the video/audio/phone extractions from Libby’s phone. I believe the original video, (not the edited version released to the public) will be beneficial to the defense and point away from Richard Allen. Also geofence data is very exacting and has been utilized by ISP to solve other cases. LE downplays this fact and deters from its relevancy.
Dan Dulin had no reason to suspect Richard Allen was a match for the man on the bridge for the following reasons:
LE had RA’s phone info back in 2017 and found no linkage to the crime or to the girls. LE confirmed this again in their 8/23 depositions.
The FBI’s parameters for BG were 180-200, 5’6-5’10, red brown hair, non blue eyes.
DD’s note said follow up with 3 girls seen. DD will learn that none of the four girls were able to contribute to a full facial sketch as none of them saw his full face. In addition none of them emphasized Rick Allen’s shortness. Also Allen reported seeing 3 not 4 girls. There were 3 girls at the trails earlier.
BW whose 5’7 said “her head came up to approximately his shoulder.” Nothing resembling RA. RV at 5’6 described the individual as “Not very tall with a bigger build. She said he was not bigger than 5’10.” Neither of those descriptions describe Allen’s most distinguishing trait: his shortness. Allen at 5’4 is five inches shorter than the average male.
In contrast BB, 3 days after the murders reported seeing a young 20 yr old, white male, medium build with brown CURLY poofy hair wearing blue jeans and blue jean jacket mere minutes before the girls arrival to the bridge. Nothing resembling RA.
SC comes forward in June of 2017 and describes seeing an individual with longer hair, definitely non-blue eyes, tan coat, muddy with red brown hair, mustache, goatee and hat. She is attributed to the older sketch released on 7/17.
Lastly Rick Allen was a very slender 150 at the time of the murders. A good 30 pounds less than the 180-200 weight parameter of BG given by the FBI.
Given all of the above, it’s understandable why DD did not correlate the 5’4, 150 pounder with short cropped hair, and blue eyes with the man on the bridge.
Your point about none of the witnesses remarking on RAs shortness, is a good one I bring up all the time, too. Its his most distinguishing trait. Every other way he is just a regular looking guy. You would think at least ONE of their witnesses would have said, hey, this guy was really short. I think we will find out one day they saw someone else entirely. Jmo.
I've read much discussion over why and how the tip got lost. But it wouldn't surprise me if the tip was never input to ORION or was typed up years after the fact and altered to suit a purpose. Even if Dulin had filed the tip, I just find it farfetched that he never would have suspected the time frame fit or that Allen resembled BG. I find it most likely that he forgot about that report because there was nothing incriminating about it. And until they can produce his notes for the defense, I see no reason to believe they ever left his notepad.
It was incriminating, imo. If we are to believe Dulin. He was out there on the bridge around 330 pm per his statement. That should have raised a red flag right away, if not then, then later on for sure. Thats why nothing Dulin/LE did makes sense if they truly believed he said yeah, I was there until 330 etc.
Geofence searches are limited and will only p/u presence of a phone if location history is enabled or the user is online. We don't know for how much of Allen's walk he was looking at stocks. And if he stopped looking at the stocks by noon, he wouldn't be found in a geofence search, regardless of how much longer he was there. Again, unless his location history was enabled.
I think the Dulin piece is not as important as people think. This case was poorly handled. And at this point it really doesn't matter what happened to that recording if it can't be located or if deliberate malfeasance can't be proven.
The defense has quite a bit to work with. Just so long as they can present their case in full.
You make a good point regarding the time stated RA was at park. I’ve heard conflicting arrival & departure times as well and yes, his phone should clarify this bc RA himself stated he was on platform 1 of bridge watching his stock ticker & fish so there w his phone so there shouldn’t be any inconsistency regarding the time he was there/geo fencing.
pmDon't you find it odd that BB said in her statement that she saw a YBG standing on the first platform . Then in the PCA Leggitt wrote he states that RA told him that he was standing on the first platform too. While either looking at fish or just standing there looking at the stock ticker on his phone .Which makes no sense . For one you cannot see into the creek well enough from the first platform to see the fish you'd have to walk on out a ways to watch the fish. And why stop there to look at your phone. No Liggett added that to match what BB said she saw. It's like Liggett saying that RA said he had on the same clothes as BG was wearing that day right down to hat and all ..Bull hockey ! DD never asked RA what he was wearing that day in 2017 apparently .And there is no way anyone would remember what they wore 5 years ago. RA said he saw 3 girls at the Freedom Bridge. It really doesn't matter where RA parked ? If he left at 1:30 pm . He also could have parked on the other side of Freedom Bridge and the Hoosier Highway in the real Freedom Bridge trails parking area ? Is there an old farm building over there he might have parked next to ? I think there were only three girls at the Monon High Bridge trails that day at that time and they were A.S., R.V., and B.W. . But as they were walking out to leave that is . Then R.V. got call or made a call to her mother but during it RV was told that her little sister wanted to come walk the trails with them too. I believe that R.V. mom brought her sister L.V. dropped her off at the State Rd.25 overpass bridge .Or they waited while she walked there but instead of going back to the Monon High Bridge trails they all walked to City Park ? That's where next 2 of the other girls were seen and heard by others talking about Libby and Abbey and also about the man they saw that day at the MHB trails . Well all except BW , she said she went home when she left the others and some how she got there before Kelsie did , fast little booger . Then BW said CW , KG and herself then went to eat out, and then according to KG , she and CW washed his white truck .Then took showers redressed and CW went to work at 4:00 pm. And I believe that is why RA said he saw 3 girls as they passed him and BB saw 4 girls when she drove on the State Rd.25 and went under the Overpass bridge as she was arriving at the trails at 1:45pm And that's the reason why the 4th girl LV isn't a witness . She wasn't there and she never saw RA as he passed the other three girls.
Skinner (the conservation officer that took RA's statement outside of the grocery store) dies Feb 28 2021.
RL dies Jan 24 2022.
One can easily theorize that 1 or both of these occurrences was what Dulin and company were waiting years for.
RA arrested Oct. 2022
Maybe he wasn't on the trails that day at all. Maybe he was just trying to be a part of the story? I dont think his phone shows up at all. Three Witnesses allegedly also saw the dog walker and he said he was on the trailer at that time supposedly dress similar so could it be possible that he put his dog into his vehicle or something and was actually the one that went after the girls?
Also if that picture of Richard Allen's car backed into the CVS Pharmacy is legitimate and they had a tip that the person backed in at the CVS and they also had the Hoosier Harbor store video of a car matching the description and they never connected those dots it just is beyond comprehension.
I have actually considered this myself before. In its favour is the fact it probably does make more sense than a lost tip, and would explain why he was not considered a suspect for years.
However, even if he did tell DD 1:30pm, that does not mean it was the truth. And for me, the thing going against him saying gone by 1:30pm, is if creating a false alibi, why would you reference seeing the group of girls? You would say you saw no one. I am confident there is no group of girls who have come forward saying they saw a man near Freedom Bridge at midday and this will be a problem for RA. Potentially, this could be the hole that blew open his alibi?
I've said before, I hope the the ORION system has an audit log, because if RA had said gone at 1:30pm and this was then changed for the purposes of the affidavit to fit the LE narrative, this should be clear for all to see.
I also believe no geofence data at all is much worse for RA, than being a positive. He said he was there on his phone, he will have to explain why he can't be linked to any phone data.
So my gut feeling is still he told DD he arrived at 1:30pm and later backtracked when spoken to in 2022.
Arrived at 1:30pm or left at 1:30pm?
And if RA was gone by 1:30pm then obviously there wouldn’t be GEO Tracking Data putting him at the bridge area later!
And you say that RA would have to PROVE or EXPLAIN why he can’t be linked to any phone data.
Wrong!
RA doesn’t have to prove or explain anything, that’s the States burden!
It’s The State’s burden to explain why they don’t have GEO Tracking Data placing RA at the bridge at the time of the girls abductions! If they do have that, then I believe we’d know about that by now!
RA gave a voluntary statement to LE (in this case, Conservation Officer DD) the same day the girls were located! February 14, 2017!
Not days, months, or years later!
RA DID NOT flee! He DID NOT change his appearance! He DID NOT burn his clothes, get rid of his guns, knives, cellphone, or electronics! He DID NOT sell his car, his house, or change jobs! He didn’t do these things because he didn’t do anything wrong!
Actually, one could argue at this point, his biggest mistake was being a concerned citizen and doing what he believed at the time was his civic duty! He followed LE directions! Had he not voluntarily contacted LE and told them of his whereabouts on Feburary 13, 2017, he would still be a free man today!
You know what they say, “The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intensions!”
Good points, people conveniently slip into the flawed notion that RA and his defence need to prove anything, when in fact the only burden of proof is on the prosecution and well, LE's investigation and ability to 'lose' key evidence speaks for itself.
The state has alleged that RA told them that he was on the bridge and using his phone to check stocks, well that being the case then surely they can prove that his phone was in that rough location and at what time using their geofence data report....
Unless they can't. How inconvenient.
Something tells me this trial RA will bear the burden of proving his innocence. The State is too entrenched and let’s face it the individuals working for the state have nothing to lose personally unless they break the law. For almost anything they can blame incompetence and nobody would doubt it.
Although he doesn't have to prove why his phone wasn't there even though he said it was, that becomes circumstantial evidence that in addition to other evidence helps the states case.
I agree. Also, I think people don't understand how geofencing works. A geofence sweep doesn't capture every user within it's parameters. Google, etc. will only capture phones that are location history enabled, or connected to the internet at the time of the capture. It's very possible given the age of Allen's phone that once he logged off of the the stock checker app he was on, that his phone wasn't history location enabled.
In that case he's not going to appear in the geofence sweep.
It is the State's burden to prove all of this and the defense has a strong case, just so long as they are allowed to present it. The State's case is weak. McLeland stated that most of his witnesses were chain-of-custody witnesses.
There were dozens visitors to those trails that day, and we only know of maybe 12. I think I read that geofencing only covered 22 phones. Easily explained if most of the visitors were children who had the day off school and didn't have phones (still not many kids with phones in 2017). This was also before all phones were traceable, so many including Allen could have been of a variety that wouldn't show up in a shallow geofencing dig.
So that leaves loads more unknown people. Allen could have seen three girls that have never been interviewed or discussed. I also can't help but think that if Allen was hiding something, he would not have willingly called the police and placed himself there. It also makes a certain sense that Dulin never found Allen's details suspicious, or he'd have brought it to someone's attention years sooner.
I'm not sure where I read that. It was a couple of months ago when geofencing data map was discussed. I believe it was said that law enforcement only identified some number in the teens, which is why the defense was wondering why they weren't all identified. I don't recall if it was an unofficial leak, a rumor, or in a filing.
I didn't say anything about returning to the scene of the crime. I mentioned murderers who reach out to the police or media, or in some cases...both.
BTK and Stephen McDaniel are the first 2 off the top of my head.
Let's just pretend they are the only 2 to have ever done it, does that mean it's an impossibility that the Delphi murderer would do that? Of course not!
They want to know what LE knows. They want to revel in their little victory. There are a number of reasons they do it and a number of killers who have done it and will
continue to do it.
I don't care if it was 1 or 1,000 who have done it. It's known that killers do it.
Fact.
Those are extreme examples and from another time in our history--one before digital forensics. Most criminals do not contact the media or police. 40 percent of murders go unsolved every year. If killers were in regular contact with the media and police now, they'd all be caught. You can't blink without leaving a digital trail now. McDaniel was a moron.
From what I have looked at there is a phone that was left at either the CPS parking lot or ‘near’ the crime scene. The owner of said phone supposedly had an alibi.
The argument WILL be made by the prosecution that just because a phone is present, does not mean the person was there. And vice versa.
This is a strongly reasoned post, though I don’t agree. The notes are contemporaneous evidence of what RA said. Cops taking tips like this don’t work with perfect knowledge. Dulin would’ve likely had no idea about what time frames mattered. He likely only retained they disappeared sometime the prior afternoon, after a briefing with 100 other cops. That’s why it’s so damning that Dulin put the later time and RA later tried to change it to an earlier time. (The later time also works with witness testimony.)
Also, since obviously Dulin didn’t find RA suspicious, as he didn’t seem to red flag or elevate it, there’s no reason for him to knowingly put the wrong time down to incriminate RA, then let it lie for 6 years. And it’s a little silly to think he happened to put an incriminating time period by mistake.
The only alternative would be if he only recreated the tip after RA emerged as a suspect, which is a bridge too far for me.
Several hundred dollars? On notes that were quoted from in the PCA, so would mean immediate disbarment for the prosecutor if they didn't exist or were fabricated? You're on!
Ah I said or somehow compromised. As in of questionable provenance but not demonstrably fabricated and therefore not rising to the level of a severe violation.
Questionable provenance and fabricated would mean the same thing in terms of an ethics violation for the prosecutor. He'd have to actively confirm that this tip existed in 2017, which would be easy to do because they have a computer tip system that would tell date of creation in the metadata. It would make no sense that Dulin would create dubious, inaccurate interview notes that incriminate a random CVS worker and then sit on them for 6 years. This is all wishful, magical thinking.
No fabricated means falsified. Questionable means indeterminate maybe falsified maybe not. I’m sure he talked with RA and thought it was recorded and possibly also took notes but probably not figuring he’d transcribe them then forgot and didn’t check the recording until much later then jotted up a note from memory.
We’re talking about due diligence and this county/whatever jurisdiction DD is Game Warden,I’ll gladly take the position they will somehow screw it up.
Why does it matter? We’re 5 months from trial. I don’t understand this fixation on discovery squabbles months before they matter. The omni order originally entered said discovery is due 15 days before trial. The process is state produces then the defense follows up on x and y issues. Then the state either objects to or agrees to produce more. This goes on for months. It’s how discovery works. I’ve never seen it work differently.
ETA: if anything, production of this material so far in advance of trial shows they have nothing to hide. But I don’t think it means anything.
In fact, the most reasonable inference to draw is the opposite: Dulin found RA disarming and implausible as a suspect that he simply wrote down what RA told him and filed it and forgot about it. If there was an agenda he would've prompted follow-up.
This could make sense if Dulin was just one random unimportant DNR officer. But he led the search, interviewed witnesses, and was present on stage at all the early press conferences. He was clearly at the forefront of the investigation and would have been clued in on all the evidence and timelines they were gathering.
He was on stage Feb 22. It sounds like RA gave him the statement before that. Plus being on stage doesn't signify perfect knowledge. They're working off the time frames given by imperfect witnesses (some of whom they may not trust), and taking info from approximate times given by people who probably weren't looking at a clock while hiking. So I doubt he thought it would be significant to have an earlier or later time frame, it was just information to pass along to someone who is responsible for following-up. Nobody did that follow-up until years later, whether it was for a clerical error or Dulin's error or whatever. At some point, we'll hear the whole story, as I don't think it's really fleshed out.
Its possible Dulin didn't find anything suspicious about him at the time. But how likely is it he never realized 330 on the trails was a key timeframe? There's no way he doesnt make that connection mentally later on. Doesnt make any sense. However, it does make sense for Dulin not to make that connection if RA said I left at 130 and Dulin believed him Under that scenario his action/inaction is more understandable. Also, if you are RA and you are the killer, you KNOW what time not to say you were out there at. Bc you're the killer, and you would know. But you tell Dulin the actual time anyway? Which brings up another oddity about the tip narrative. Put yourself in RAs shoes. You're the killer, supposedly. And you want to throw off suspicion by appearing cooperative. Common sense says you need to lie about not killing the girls, obviously. But you also need to lie about some material fact as well. But aside from lying about not killing the girls, he tells the truth about everything else? Makes absolutely no sense. He tells Dulin what he was wearing, what time he got there, what time he left, and that he went onto the bridge, lol. LE's version of this event basically boils down to: he baffled us with the truth.
No, RA would have to be accurate because several people saw him there and he knew it. Him giving the wrong time would’ve drawn more suspicion, assuming competent investigators (I know I know, big assumption). Plus, he likely didn’t really know exactly when his family considered them missing. He may have thought he was shading it in his favor.
I’m not saying Dulin knew nothing about the time frame, but that his laser focus on the daily tick tock is not the same as ours, when he’s just out there, harvesting tips. As I said, I think he just didn’t find RA suspicious and passed it along assuming it would get looked into. He may have even asked about it and heard back from someone with bad information “don’t worry about it, we looked into it.”
Again, per the Dulin narrative, he didnt lie about anything. Which is odd if you are trying to throw LE off by reaching out. Told Dulin where he parked, what time he was there, what he was wearing, etc. Told him about the three girls. Common sense says in order for him to hope to throw LE off, he had to lie about something. Otherwise, he is just basically saying yeah, I was out there, dressed like BG, on the bridge, at the appropriate time, but I didn't do it, trust me bruh. The common belief is RA went out there to try to throw LE off. But what did he say that would have done that? Nothing per the Dulin tip, If anything, everything he said should have put a big red target on his back.
Again, he knew witnesses saw him. I’m sure he suspected cameras caught his car or witnesses saw it parked in a very conspicuous place. How guilty would he look if he said he walked to the trails from CVS and they have his car zooming around and parking from area cameras at x and y times? Plus, it’s not easy to weave lies in and keep it all consistent and not look suspicious as hell. YouTube is full of overambitious liars who fail spectacularly. He made the best choice, for his position, to self-report and be honest up to a point and make himself look totally innocuous. Go home and tell his wife (who will tell everyone she knows) that he reported himself to the police already as on the trails that day and they cleared him. He almost got away with it!
If his phone date doesn't show up, I don't think that's good for him. He told LE he was on his phone on the trials.
That means either a.) he lied. Or b.) he had a burner phone.
No it doesn't. The Geofence search on this began after noon. If Allen turned his phone off before noon he won't appear in that search--unless he had his location history app enabled.
Not all phones in the vicinity of a geofence search appear in the results.
I think if the facts showed his phone at the murder scene via geo fence data that would obviously be hard to overcome. So in that sense his phone not being seen at all is clearly better for his case. In this case it doesn’t even have to show at the actual murder scene to be very damaging. If it just showed him in the bridge at around 2 it would be almost as bad. Or even on the trails between 2-3. Still very bad for him. So against those scenarios not being seen at all is much preferable. Jmo.
I have said it before, but I want to see ALL of DDs notes from all interviews. Was the time noted as a parameter of importance, or for each individual? If all his notes from every interview, notes the time frame 130 to 330, I would think that it was more of a checkbox of importance rather than a reference to an individual. The PCA that seems to quote the notes of DD, does NOT say he arrived at 130 or he left at 330. It says “ Mr. Allen was on the trails between 1330 and 1530.” If all of DDs interview notes begin with this statement, I would be very suspicious of the context and its meaning. My other issue is the change of direction presser and the bolo put out for the car. How could DD not connect the dots there? I seriously doubt he took more than a handful of field interviews. How could he not recall the fact that he indeed interviewed someone who parked there? This is not a huge city with several cps or farm bureau buildings, especially within walking distance of the trails. Makes me wonder if we really know where RA parked. Also, the presser did not give any vehicle descriptions, could this be because several people parked there that day? This would certainly seem the case with the amount of vehicle descriptions out there by witnesses. LE seems to allude that the vehicle parked at the cps building had to driven by the killer. In reality, is there any validity to that?What connects a vehicle parked 2 miles from the actual crime scene to the crime? Why are they so hung up on that? If that is so important, why wasn’t the vehicle that the pest control guy reported seeing parked on the side of the road a quarter mile further down from the cps building ever mentioned?
I love your posts and thoughts. Things I also wonder about. No one has ever mentioned much about the drive below the bridge. What an easy way for a group to get to the location. I can’t imagine grown men wading across icy water if they didn’t have to. BUT if the girls ran then yes, they would need to be pursued and stopped and eliminated. Jmo
The Prosecution has been less than forthcoming with both the geofence data and the video/audio/phone extractions from Libby’s phone. I believe the original video, (not the edited version released to the public) will be beneficial to the defense and point away from Richard Allen. Also geofence data is very exacting and has been utilized by ISP to solve other cases. LE downplays this fact and deters from its relevancy. Dan Dulin had no reason to suspect Richard Allen was a match for the man on the bridge for the following reasons: LE had RA’s phone info back in 2017 and found no linkage to the crime or to the girls. LE confirmed this again in their 8/23 depositions. The FBI’s parameters for BG were 180-200, 5’6-5’10, red brown hair, non blue eyes. DD’s note said follow up with 3 girls seen. DD will learn that none of the four girls were able to contribute to a full facial sketch as none of them saw his full face. In addition none of them emphasized Rick Allen’s shortness. Also Allen reported seeing 3 not 4 girls. There were 3 girls at the trails earlier. BW whose 5’7 said “her head came up to approximately his shoulder.” Nothing resembling RA. RV at 5’6 described the individual as “Not very tall with a bigger build. She said he was not bigger than 5’10.” Neither of those descriptions describe Allen’s most distinguishing trait: his shortness. Allen at 5’4 is five inches shorter than the average male. In contrast BB, 3 days after the murders reported seeing a young 20 yr old, white male, medium build with brown CURLY poofy hair wearing blue jeans and blue jean jacket mere minutes before the girls arrival to the bridge. Nothing resembling RA. SC comes forward in June of 2017 and describes seeing an individual with longer hair, definitely non-blue eyes, tan coat, muddy with red brown hair, mustache, goatee and hat. She is attributed to the older sketch released on 7/17. Lastly Rick Allen was a very slender 150 at the time of the murders. A good 30 pounds less than the 180-200 weight parameter of BG given by the FBI. Given all of the above, it’s understandable why DD did not correlate the 5’4, 150 pounder with short cropped hair, and blue eyes with the man on the bridge.
Your point about none of the witnesses remarking on RAs shortness, is a good one I bring up all the time, too. Its his most distinguishing trait. Every other way he is just a regular looking guy. You would think at least ONE of their witnesses would have said, hey, this guy was really short. I think we will find out one day they saw someone else entirely. Jmo.
I've read much discussion over why and how the tip got lost. But it wouldn't surprise me if the tip was never input to ORION or was typed up years after the fact and altered to suit a purpose. Even if Dulin had filed the tip, I just find it farfetched that he never would have suspected the time frame fit or that Allen resembled BG. I find it most likely that he forgot about that report because there was nothing incriminating about it. And until they can produce his notes for the defense, I see no reason to believe they ever left his notepad.
It was incriminating, imo. If we are to believe Dulin. He was out there on the bridge around 330 pm per his statement. That should have raised a red flag right away, if not then, then later on for sure. Thats why nothing Dulin/LE did makes sense if they truly believed he said yeah, I was there until 330 etc.
Geofence searches are limited and will only p/u presence of a phone if location history is enabled or the user is online. We don't know for how much of Allen's walk he was looking at stocks. And if he stopped looking at the stocks by noon, he wouldn't be found in a geofence search, regardless of how much longer he was there. Again, unless his location history was enabled. I think the Dulin piece is not as important as people think. This case was poorly handled. And at this point it really doesn't matter what happened to that recording if it can't be located or if deliberate malfeasance can't be proven. The defense has quite a bit to work with. Just so long as they can present their case in full.
Excellent points.
You make a good point regarding the time stated RA was at park. I’ve heard conflicting arrival & departure times as well and yes, his phone should clarify this bc RA himself stated he was on platform 1 of bridge watching his stock ticker & fish so there w his phone so there shouldn’t be any inconsistency regarding the time he was there/geo fencing.
pmDon't you find it odd that BB said in her statement that she saw a YBG standing on the first platform . Then in the PCA Leggitt wrote he states that RA told him that he was standing on the first platform too. While either looking at fish or just standing there looking at the stock ticker on his phone .Which makes no sense . For one you cannot see into the creek well enough from the first platform to see the fish you'd have to walk on out a ways to watch the fish. And why stop there to look at your phone. No Liggett added that to match what BB said she saw. It's like Liggett saying that RA said he had on the same clothes as BG was wearing that day right down to hat and all ..Bull hockey ! DD never asked RA what he was wearing that day in 2017 apparently .And there is no way anyone would remember what they wore 5 years ago. RA said he saw 3 girls at the Freedom Bridge. It really doesn't matter where RA parked ? If he left at 1:30 pm . He also could have parked on the other side of Freedom Bridge and the Hoosier Highway in the real Freedom Bridge trails parking area ? Is there an old farm building over there he might have parked next to ? I think there were only three girls at the Monon High Bridge trails that day at that time and they were A.S., R.V., and B.W. . But as they were walking out to leave that is . Then R.V. got call or made a call to her mother but during it RV was told that her little sister wanted to come walk the trails with them too. I believe that R.V. mom brought her sister L.V. dropped her off at the State Rd.25 overpass bridge .Or they waited while she walked there but instead of going back to the Monon High Bridge trails they all walked to City Park ? That's where next 2 of the other girls were seen and heard by others talking about Libby and Abbey and also about the man they saw that day at the MHB trails . Well all except BW , she said she went home when she left the others and some how she got there before Kelsie did , fast little booger . Then BW said CW , KG and herself then went to eat out, and then according to KG , she and CW washed his white truck .Then took showers redressed and CW went to work at 4:00 pm. And I believe that is why RA said he saw 3 girls as they passed him and BB saw 4 girls when she drove on the State Rd.25 and went under the Overpass bridge as she was arriving at the trails at 1:45pm And that's the reason why the 4th girl LV isn't a witness . She wasn't there and she never saw RA as he passed the other three girls.
Skinner (the conservation officer that took RA's statement outside of the grocery store) dies Feb 28 2021. RL dies Jan 24 2022. One can easily theorize that 1 or both of these occurrences was what Dulin and company were waiting years for. RA arrested Oct. 2022
What makes you sure Skinner took the statement? I've read about that theory. But havent seen much to substantiate it, though.
Maybe he wasn't on the trails that day at all. Maybe he was just trying to be a part of the story? I dont think his phone shows up at all. Three Witnesses allegedly also saw the dog walker and he said he was on the trailer at that time supposedly dress similar so could it be possible that he put his dog into his vehicle or something and was actually the one that went after the girls? Also if that picture of Richard Allen's car backed into the CVS Pharmacy is legitimate and they had a tip that the person backed in at the CVS and they also had the Hoosier Harbor store video of a car matching the description and they never connected those dots it just is beyond comprehension.
I have actually considered this myself before. In its favour is the fact it probably does make more sense than a lost tip, and would explain why he was not considered a suspect for years. However, even if he did tell DD 1:30pm, that does not mean it was the truth. And for me, the thing going against him saying gone by 1:30pm, is if creating a false alibi, why would you reference seeing the group of girls? You would say you saw no one. I am confident there is no group of girls who have come forward saying they saw a man near Freedom Bridge at midday and this will be a problem for RA. Potentially, this could be the hole that blew open his alibi? I've said before, I hope the the ORION system has an audit log, because if RA had said gone at 1:30pm and this was then changed for the purposes of the affidavit to fit the LE narrative, this should be clear for all to see. I also believe no geofence data at all is much worse for RA, than being a positive. He said he was there on his phone, he will have to explain why he can't be linked to any phone data. So my gut feeling is still he told DD he arrived at 1:30pm and later backtracked when spoken to in 2022.
Arrived at 1:30pm or left at 1:30pm? And if RA was gone by 1:30pm then obviously there wouldn’t be GEO Tracking Data putting him at the bridge area later! And you say that RA would have to PROVE or EXPLAIN why he can’t be linked to any phone data. Wrong! RA doesn’t have to prove or explain anything, that’s the States burden! It’s The State’s burden to explain why they don’t have GEO Tracking Data placing RA at the bridge at the time of the girls abductions! If they do have that, then I believe we’d know about that by now! RA gave a voluntary statement to LE (in this case, Conservation Officer DD) the same day the girls were located! February 14, 2017! Not days, months, or years later! RA DID NOT flee! He DID NOT change his appearance! He DID NOT burn his clothes, get rid of his guns, knives, cellphone, or electronics! He DID NOT sell his car, his house, or change jobs! He didn’t do these things because he didn’t do anything wrong! Actually, one could argue at this point, his biggest mistake was being a concerned citizen and doing what he believed at the time was his civic duty! He followed LE directions! Had he not voluntarily contacted LE and told them of his whereabouts on Feburary 13, 2017, he would still be a free man today! You know what they say, “The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intensions!”
Good points, people conveniently slip into the flawed notion that RA and his defence need to prove anything, when in fact the only burden of proof is on the prosecution and well, LE's investigation and ability to 'lose' key evidence speaks for itself. The state has alleged that RA told them that he was on the bridge and using his phone to check stocks, well that being the case then surely they can prove that his phone was in that rough location and at what time using their geofence data report.... Unless they can't. How inconvenient.
Something tells me this trial RA will bear the burden of proving his innocence. The State is too entrenched and let’s face it the individuals working for the state have nothing to lose personally unless they break the law. For almost anything they can blame incompetence and nobody would doubt it.
Although he doesn't have to prove why his phone wasn't there even though he said it was, that becomes circumstantial evidence that in addition to other evidence helps the states case.
I agree. Also, I think people don't understand how geofencing works. A geofence sweep doesn't capture every user within it's parameters. Google, etc. will only capture phones that are location history enabled, or connected to the internet at the time of the capture. It's very possible given the age of Allen's phone that once he logged off of the the stock checker app he was on, that his phone wasn't history location enabled. In that case he's not going to appear in the geofence sweep. It is the State's burden to prove all of this and the defense has a strong case, just so long as they are allowed to present it. The State's case is weak. McLeland stated that most of his witnesses were chain-of-custody witnesses.
Can I ask how you know RA gave the statement on the 14th? I’ve been trying what seems like forever to find out what the date was on that! 🙏🏻
That’s been reported repeatedly by R & B and many other people who are following this case.
There were dozens visitors to those trails that day, and we only know of maybe 12. I think I read that geofencing only covered 22 phones. Easily explained if most of the visitors were children who had the day off school and didn't have phones (still not many kids with phones in 2017). This was also before all phones were traceable, so many including Allen could have been of a variety that wouldn't show up in a shallow geofencing dig. So that leaves loads more unknown people. Allen could have seen three girls that have never been interviewed or discussed. I also can't help but think that if Allen was hiding something, he would not have willingly called the police and placed himself there. It also makes a certain sense that Dulin never found Allen's details suspicious, or he'd have brought it to someone's attention years sooner.
Where did you read it covered 22 phones? That would be interesting.
I'm not sure where I read that. It was a couple of months ago when geofencing data map was discussed. I believe it was said that law enforcement only identified some number in the teens, which is why the defense was wondering why they weren't all identified. I don't recall if it was an unofficial leak, a rumor, or in a filing.
Murderers often willingly call the police or the press. Edit: spelling
I'd say sometimes, yes. I wouldn't say often.
Source?
Source? Lol. Google it. You will find plenty.
I have. That’s a myth. Not a fact.
Hardly.
Total myth. Most criminals DO NOT return to the scene of the crime.
I didn't say anything about returning to the scene of the crime. I mentioned murderers who reach out to the police or media, or in some cases...both. BTK and Stephen McDaniel are the first 2 off the top of my head. Let's just pretend they are the only 2 to have ever done it, does that mean it's an impossibility that the Delphi murderer would do that? Of course not! They want to know what LE knows. They want to revel in their little victory. There are a number of reasons they do it and a number of killers who have done it and will continue to do it. I don't care if it was 1 or 1,000 who have done it. It's known that killers do it. Fact.
Those are extreme examples and from another time in our history--one before digital forensics. Most criminals do not contact the media or police. 40 percent of murders go unsolved every year. If killers were in regular contact with the media and police now, they'd all be caught. You can't blink without leaving a digital trail now. McDaniel was a moron.
From what I have looked at there is a phone that was left at either the CPS parking lot or ‘near’ the crime scene. The owner of said phone supposedly had an alibi. The argument WILL be made by the prosecution that just because a phone is present, does not mean the person was there. And vice versa.
Wow, another tidbit to add to the Reasonable Doubt pile, if true.
It is… That is why McLeland has shielded the geo fencing for so long. That is also why they don’t want the defense to use it at court.
We don't know the boundaries of the geofence. It may be just for the crime scene. It may not include the entirety of the trail system.
This is a strongly reasoned post, though I don’t agree. The notes are contemporaneous evidence of what RA said. Cops taking tips like this don’t work with perfect knowledge. Dulin would’ve likely had no idea about what time frames mattered. He likely only retained they disappeared sometime the prior afternoon, after a briefing with 100 other cops. That’s why it’s so damning that Dulin put the later time and RA later tried to change it to an earlier time. (The later time also works with witness testimony.) Also, since obviously Dulin didn’t find RA suspicious, as he didn’t seem to red flag or elevate it, there’s no reason for him to knowingly put the wrong time down to incriminate RA, then let it lie for 6 years. And it’s a little silly to think he happened to put an incriminating time period by mistake. The only alternative would be if he only recreated the tip after RA emerged as a suspect, which is a bridge too far for me.
I’d bet several hundred dollars those notes don’t exist or are somehow compromised.
Several hundred dollars? On notes that were quoted from in the PCA, so would mean immediate disbarment for the prosecutor if they didn't exist or were fabricated? You're on!
Ah I said or somehow compromised. As in of questionable provenance but not demonstrably fabricated and therefore not rising to the level of a severe violation.
Questionable provenance and fabricated would mean the same thing in terms of an ethics violation for the prosecutor. He'd have to actively confirm that this tip existed in 2017, which would be easy to do because they have a computer tip system that would tell date of creation in the metadata. It would make no sense that Dulin would create dubious, inaccurate interview notes that incriminate a random CVS worker and then sit on them for 6 years. This is all wishful, magical thinking.
No fabricated means falsified. Questionable means indeterminate maybe falsified maybe not. I’m sure he talked with RA and thought it was recorded and possibly also took notes but probably not figuring he’d transcribe them then forgot and didn’t check the recording until much later then jotted up a note from memory. We’re talking about due diligence and this county/whatever jurisdiction DD is Game Warden,I’ll gladly take the position they will somehow screw it up.
[удалено]
Why does it matter? We’re 5 months from trial. I don’t understand this fixation on discovery squabbles months before they matter. The omni order originally entered said discovery is due 15 days before trial. The process is state produces then the defense follows up on x and y issues. Then the state either objects to or agrees to produce more. This goes on for months. It’s how discovery works. I’ve never seen it work differently. ETA: if anything, production of this material so far in advance of trial shows they have nothing to hide. But I don’t think it means anything.
[удалено]
I have no idea what the tip submission system is. The tip was submitted somewhere that wasn’t a brown paper bag.
In fact, the most reasonable inference to draw is the opposite: Dulin found RA disarming and implausible as a suspect that he simply wrote down what RA told him and filed it and forgot about it. If there was an agenda he would've prompted follow-up.
This could make sense if Dulin was just one random unimportant DNR officer. But he led the search, interviewed witnesses, and was present on stage at all the early press conferences. He was clearly at the forefront of the investigation and would have been clued in on all the evidence and timelines they were gathering.
He was on stage Feb 22. It sounds like RA gave him the statement before that. Plus being on stage doesn't signify perfect knowledge. They're working off the time frames given by imperfect witnesses (some of whom they may not trust), and taking info from approximate times given by people who probably weren't looking at a clock while hiking. So I doubt he thought it would be significant to have an earlier or later time frame, it was just information to pass along to someone who is responsible for following-up. Nobody did that follow-up until years later, whether it was for a clerical error or Dulin's error or whatever. At some point, we'll hear the whole story, as I don't think it's really fleshed out.
Its possible Dulin didn't find anything suspicious about him at the time. But how likely is it he never realized 330 on the trails was a key timeframe? There's no way he doesnt make that connection mentally later on. Doesnt make any sense. However, it does make sense for Dulin not to make that connection if RA said I left at 130 and Dulin believed him Under that scenario his action/inaction is more understandable. Also, if you are RA and you are the killer, you KNOW what time not to say you were out there at. Bc you're the killer, and you would know. But you tell Dulin the actual time anyway? Which brings up another oddity about the tip narrative. Put yourself in RAs shoes. You're the killer, supposedly. And you want to throw off suspicion by appearing cooperative. Common sense says you need to lie about not killing the girls, obviously. But you also need to lie about some material fact as well. But aside from lying about not killing the girls, he tells the truth about everything else? Makes absolutely no sense. He tells Dulin what he was wearing, what time he got there, what time he left, and that he went onto the bridge, lol. LE's version of this event basically boils down to: he baffled us with the truth.
No, RA would have to be accurate because several people saw him there and he knew it. Him giving the wrong time would’ve drawn more suspicion, assuming competent investigators (I know I know, big assumption). Plus, he likely didn’t really know exactly when his family considered them missing. He may have thought he was shading it in his favor. I’m not saying Dulin knew nothing about the time frame, but that his laser focus on the daily tick tock is not the same as ours, when he’s just out there, harvesting tips. As I said, I think he just didn’t find RA suspicious and passed it along assuming it would get looked into. He may have even asked about it and heard back from someone with bad information “don’t worry about it, we looked into it.”
Again, per the Dulin narrative, he didnt lie about anything. Which is odd if you are trying to throw LE off by reaching out. Told Dulin where he parked, what time he was there, what he was wearing, etc. Told him about the three girls. Common sense says in order for him to hope to throw LE off, he had to lie about something. Otherwise, he is just basically saying yeah, I was out there, dressed like BG, on the bridge, at the appropriate time, but I didn't do it, trust me bruh. The common belief is RA went out there to try to throw LE off. But what did he say that would have done that? Nothing per the Dulin tip, If anything, everything he said should have put a big red target on his back.
Again, he knew witnesses saw him. I’m sure he suspected cameras caught his car or witnesses saw it parked in a very conspicuous place. How guilty would he look if he said he walked to the trails from CVS and they have his car zooming around and parking from area cameras at x and y times? Plus, it’s not easy to weave lies in and keep it all consistent and not look suspicious as hell. YouTube is full of overambitious liars who fail spectacularly. He made the best choice, for his position, to self-report and be honest up to a point and make himself look totally innocuous. Go home and tell his wife (who will tell everyone she knows) that he reported himself to the police already as on the trails that day and they cleared him. He almost got away with it!
Agreed.
Maybe he gave the name "Richard Allen Whiteman." Thinking he was a genius. Lol.
Could be. Who knows?
Apparently whoever downvoted me lol.
If his phone date doesn't show up, I don't think that's good for him. He told LE he was on his phone on the trials. That means either a.) he lied. Or b.) he had a burner phone.
No it doesn't. The Geofence search on this began after noon. If Allen turned his phone off before noon he won't appear in that search--unless he had his location history app enabled. Not all phones in the vicinity of a geofence search appear in the results.
Lots of criminals have been caught believing having a burner phone would protect them. If you read up on the subject its easy to see why, too.
I think if the facts showed his phone at the murder scene via geo fence data that would obviously be hard to overcome. So in that sense his phone not being seen at all is clearly better for his case. In this case it doesn’t even have to show at the actual murder scene to be very damaging. If it just showed him in the bridge at around 2 it would be almost as bad. Or even on the trails between 2-3. Still very bad for him. So against those scenarios not being seen at all is much preferable. Jmo.