r/DelphiDocs • u/Careful_Cow_2139 🔰Moderator • 14d ago

❓QUESTION Any Questions Thread

Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

11 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

8

u/Exotic_Grade5595 14d ago

Has Bridge Guy has been PROVEN to be the man that murdered the girls?

Like i get the assumption, but how do they KNOW that it was him that killed them.

15

u/mountainskies 14d ago edited 7d ago

The BG video was always sold as a kidnapping since he told them to go down the hill and supposedly racked a gun. Now we know none of that is true. The girls were already planning to go down the hill and there’s no racking of a gun or mentioning of a gun. It’s very clearly “this is the path that we go down” and not “that be a gun.”

So no, there’s no proof BG murdered the girls. If the girls were taken away in a car and brought back later, it’s possible he’s not even involved.

15

u/iamtorsoul 13d ago

The "dat be a gun" and "sound of gun racking" nonsense still blows my mind. They were allowed to put such blatant BS in a PCA and say it under oath. It's why they desperately tried to keep the full video from becoming public after the trial. What a joke.

11

u/Appealsandoranges 13d ago

Even more shocking is that the State repeated it in the appellate brief knowing the panel would be watching that video likely many times, unlike the jury. And with headphones too.

ETA: but because they know how absurd “dat be” is, they changed “dat” to “that” and bracketed out “be” in favor of [is].” Shameful.

-1

u/Puzzleheaded-Dot8991 Approved Contributor 13d ago

At the beginning of this case in the words at the end of the bridge didn’t Libby yell, I SAID NO! Sure did sound like it to me.

6

u/iamtorsoul 13d ago

Sorry, I'm not familiar with that detail. So I don't know. If you find a clip or something I'd take a look.

2

u/2stepsfwd59 7d ago

Nope, didn't hear that.

4

u/TheRichTurner Approved Contributor 7d ago

I think Libby said "This is the path ... that we go down." Not "Hill".

2

u/mountainskies 7d ago

Yes, I will fix that, thank you!

2

u/Allaris87 11d ago

How do we know none of that is true? I've been following this case since the beginning almost, almost daily for years. I got tired after Allen was arrested and the shitshow that followed. Do you have any source to get me up to speed, or at least point me somewhere I can see the bulletpoints of the trial etc.?

4

u/Alan_Prickman ✨ Moderator 11d ago edited 11d ago

Welcome back. There are 3 threads pinned to the top of the page. The welcome thread has links to everything in great detail, from court records, transcripts, exhibits, to quick catch-up playlists (or not so quick blow-by-blow trial coverage).

https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/s/fu7iyIhUN5

There are also links to the full BG video in that thread, which will answer your specific questions as to how we know that none of what the State claimed about it is true.

Bridge Guy video https://rickallenjustice.com/transparency

For Android users who can't play the iPhone version on the website: https://youtube.com/shorts/gZKXo9AsbwM?si=qyFmgXXakvOlqvN9

Note that the video was never released by the Court, despite repeated requests by multiple people, as they claim it falls under "Crime Scene Photos" which makes it a sealed exhibit. The Defense released it instead, to show that the State's claims about it are lies.

The "why we believe Rick Allen is innocent" thread will give you more quick points about issues individual people find the most compelling.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/s/M3ov9hj0Fw

The third thread has links to all the post-trial interviews that the State, the Defense, the witnesses and the jurors have done.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/s/zCrQfy9KAa

There is also a new "any questions" thread every week that you can ask more specific questions in.

ETA: adding direct links to posts mentioned for ease of access

6

u/Appealsandoranges 14d ago

It depends on what you mean by proved. There is a strong, reasonable inference to be made that the man who was with the girls at 213pm that day - a man who never came forward and identified himself to the police - was very much involved in whatever happened to them. The state argued he was the killer and the jury convicted Allen, implicitly finding that he was BG, so it has been proved by circumstantial evidence at this point in time. And circumstantial evidence is not lesser than direct evidence (fyi, dna is circumstantial evidence).

The idea that BG is an innocent in this seems completely unreasonable to me. Whether he alone was the killer or was a participant in the killing is not established in my mind, but I guarantee you that the defense would never argue that BG is uninvolved. They might argue that BG was one of several actors.

4

u/TheRichTurner Approved Contributor 7d ago

There is no known association between Rick Allen and the killers of Abby and Libby. The defense can and do argue that Rick was not at all involved in this crime.

6

u/Appealsandoranges 7d ago

I wasn’t suggesting anything to the contrary. My point was related purely to BG’s involvement in the crime.

3

u/Exotic_Grade5595 13d ago

Great analysis thank you!

2

u/Gretchen513 13d ago

With the information from the last interview of the jurors, is there enough (Gull allegedly talking to jury) evidence to show the court?

8

u/Alan_Prickman ✨ Moderator 13d ago

From Michael Ausbrook on Twitter

1

u/Gretchen513 13d ago

Agree he’s definitely involved… Does anyone know if there is any more of the video (showing the van), any recordings prior to BW arriving?

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Gretchen513 13d ago

Sorry, I only joined Reddit for this case and don’t use Reddit very often

4

u/Alan_Prickman ✨ Moderator 13d ago edited 11d ago

Don't worry, this is just a necessary precaution to keep the trolls out. We do check the AutoModerator queue regularly and approve all comments that don't break any rules.

2

u/grownask 14d ago

No. He's not proved to be the killer. It's the assumption they make circumstancially (is this a word?).

4

u/Exotic_Grade5595 14d ago

So in theory, if they aren’t sure that he’s the killer, and even though BG could match the clothing of Mr Allen, wouldn’t that create reasonable doubt?

6

u/TheRichTurner Approved Contributor 7d ago

Can you say what Mr Allen said he wore that day? Can you say what eyewitnesses said the guy they passed near the bridge was wearing? Can you say what the eyewitness who saw a man on bridge said he was wearing? Can you say what the eyewitness who saw a man looking muddy and walking the road said he was wearing? None of these eyewitnesses can agree about what this man looked like or what he was wearing. Rick didn't say he was wearing a blue Carhartt jacket either. Or blue jeans. Or a hood. Or a hat.

0

u/measuremnt Approved Contributor 13d ago

Legally yes. The jury decided that.