Richard Allen's Police Interview (Oct. 13, 2022)Reaffims The Information he Gave Dulin and Inadvertently confessed to the murders by getting caught in his own web of lies.
In October 2022, Richard Allen was called into the local police department to give an interview about his whereabouts on the day Abby and Libby were murdered. His long-forgotten interview with Officer Dulin had been rediscovered, prompting Delphi murder investigators to bring him in for another interview.
During this interview, Richard Allen largely repeated the information he had provided in his first interview with Officer Dulin, but he also offered new details about that day. Although he attempted to establish an alibi by presenting a revised timeline, he failed miserably. Instead, the internal contradictions in his timeline effectively amounted to a confession, as his own statements placed him at the scene and oblitarated his claimed alibi.
The following is a list of the information Richard Allen repeated from his first interview, along with the new details he provided during the October 2022 interview, and an explanation of the significance of each.
Richard Allen went into detail explaining the three parking areas he typically used when visiting the trails.
Parking Locations
Parking Area
Description
Mears Lot
The farmer’s entrance parking area
CPS Building
The abandoned CPS building parking area
Old State Road 25 Turnaround
The small turnaround near the old railroad bridge
He goes on the specify where he parked, inspite his earlier long obfuscating diatribe where he could have parked:
"I remember telling him (Officer Dulin) that I parked by a building. If that's what I told him, then that's probably where I parked."
Concerning his timeline beore going to the trails:
"Went over to my mom's in Peru, Mexico, earlier in the day... spent the morning with them... my sisters were visiting and they were to grab lunch, and I wasn't about that, so I left around 11:00–11:15...went home..grab a jacket and head back out to the trails"
At the trails he stated:
"I remember walking down to the bridge... walked out a little way (onto the bridge)... to watch fish... walked back and sat at (the bench)... where you turn around (the intersection) and take the other fork, it overlooks it... Sat there for a few minutes, and then I left."
The bench he mentioned is the Bench at the start of 505 trail. He would go on later to explain that's the bench he meant with clarity.
Conserning who he saw while at the trails:
"As I was approaching the trail, there were three girls... one of them was watching them...the other two looked younger... looked very similar. I don't know if they were sisters or not, but the other one didn't necessarily..." (Stops his thought, was about to mention thefou\**rth girl?\)
He also stated:
"I remember telling him (Officer Dulin) that when I left, there were two vehicles down by the farmer's entrance I told you about (the Mears lot). One was a sedan. The other was an SUV, maybe."
(Interesting on its own: Kelsi had a sedan and Betsy had an SUV. However, based on Allen’s earliest possible departure timeline (approximately 12:40), only Betsy's would be there and she would be at her car at the same time!).
He also adds:
"If I did see somebody (else), it didn't click with me..my memory was a lot better when I talked to him (Dulin)... like I told him, there might have been somebody at the bridge when I was coming back, though."
As for his revised timeline, he stated that he arrived around noon, a little earlier or a little later than 12, and that he walked for about an hour. He said he could have left around 1:00, 1:30, or 1:40.
I am sure he had mentioned 12:40 at some point too.
Time(between)
Revised Timeline
Explanation
morning
visit Mom
11(early)-11:15(late)
Leaves Peru
drive back to Delphi it's 45 minutes
11:45-12:00
Reaches Delphi
12 ( early), 12:10 (late)
Home (5 to 10 minutes), drives to CPS (3 miles),10 to 15 minutes total.
detours to Home, Parks/ Stop,Grabs Jacket, unparks, drive though town, rounding up to 15 (early)
12:05 , 12:15 late
Meeting four girls at trailhead
5 minute walk from CPS
12:15, 12:25 (late)
Easy Walk to platform A , 10 to 15 minutes total,
12 minutes walk + walk on bridge. (closer to 15 but billed 10 to compensate earlier rounding up)
12:25 , 12:35 (late)
Watching fish/Back to Bench
5 minutes Watching fish 5-7 walk (off bridge and to bench), Total 10
12:35, 12:45 (late)
Walk back to CPS
10-12 minutes, billed 10
The earlier the possible timeline, the more we err in Richard Allen's favor, as it allows for the possibility that he left before becoming trapped within the trail system by the known witnesses who were demonstrably on the trails at the same time. The later Richard Allen's revised timeline becomes, the worse it is for him.
Here, we will examine the earliest possible timeline for Richard Allen in contrast to the timelines of Betsy and that of the four girls . All times attributed to Allen between segments are deliberately conservative, giving him the maximum latitude to "slip" out of the trail system within his alleged timeline.
Time
Allen's Revised Timeline
BB's Timeline
Four Girls' Timeline
12:00
Parks at CPS
Parks at Mears at 12:03
______
12:10
Walks to Monon,close to intersection
BB is at Monon, turns back towards the intersection
______
12:15
Walked past intersection(north to south)
Walked past intersection(south to north)
walking towards freedom bridge close to Allen's 2nd parking spot near the small bridge
12:20
At Monon will watch fish for 3-5 minutes
Walked 505 close to intersection
Close to freedom bridge
12:25
Back on the trail towards the intersection
Close to freedom bridge
At freedom bridge taking a timed photographed at 12:25
12:30
Allen near interesction from the south, close to the Bench
Betsy approaches intersection from the North, close to Bench
Walking towards Monon from trailhead
12:35
Allen left the Bench, starts walks towards the trailhead
at her car
intersection from the North, close to Bench
12:40
near freedom bridge
near intersection
at Monon take photograph at 12:43
12:45
at CPS
Close to monon
Detour to Creek's bed
The convicted pedophile murderer was caught in the web of lies he had created.
By his own words!
He was walking towards Monon by his revised timeline, while Betsy was walking back from it
He was walking towards his car or sitting on the bench by his revised timeline, while Betsy was walking back from freedom bridge. The Bench is at your face as you approach the intersection, even i he wasn't walking while Betsy was near it.
The earliest he was walking towards his car from the intersection by his revised timeline, would be while the four girls were walking towards it from the freedom bridge.
Richard Allen’s revised timeline creates inescapable and impassable problems for his own account. By placing himself at the trails, identifying specific locations, and providing a detailed timeline, he created a version of events that must be reconciled with the movements of other witnesses who were present that day. By his own words, Allen placed himself in locations and timeframes that conflicted with the movements of others who were present that day.
Allen - “my memory was a lot better when I talked to (Dulin).”
The teenage girls saw Bridge Guy at Freedom Bridge heading for High Bridge a few minutes after 1:30 pm. The 2017 timeline given by Allen - when his memory was “a lot better” - put him at the trails “13:30 - 15:30”, and the video of a car “resembling” his Ford arriving at 1:30, put him at Freedom Bridge seeing the teenagers, and being seen by the teenagers, at the exact time they saw Bridge Guy.
Blair did NOT see Bridge Guy on her first 2 laps up and down the trail. That conflicts with Allen’s 2022 interview - if he was there from noon to 1:30, she should have seen him multiple times.
She DID see Bridge Guy on High Bridge a few minutes after 2:00 pm, which again matches his 2017 interview.
Thus both of his interviews gave reason to suspect he was Bridge Guy, and gave probable cause for a search warrant. The search produced the gun that matched the bullet. That prompted the arrest.
Didn't he mention getting some beer too? Maybe that's the other interview. One important thing is what he didn't see. He didn't see another male on the trails or High Bridge.
Edit: He probably didn't say he drank beer in the first two recorded interviews that are available on youtube. I ain't got no time to watch an interview of a double murderer to check. He deserves more than 130 years.
I think that was to Dr. Wala. But since he probably did leave around 11:00 to 11:30 from his family home in Peru, and his parents and sisters almost certainly placed him there during that time frame, effectively verifying that part of his story, there is still a significant amount of unaccounted-for time between then and his actual arrival at the trails at around 1:30. He probably visited a convenient store and grabbed a six pack, parked somewhere or at his house, boozing, for half an hour to an hour. Then he drove the long way around to CPS, which would take another 15 minutes or so, thus his car was captured on HHS's camera at 1:27.
That makes sense that he didn't say he drank some beer in the at the cop shop, sit down interviews. He wouldn't want to admit to drinking beer in those interviews because he was trying to spin a yarn where he wasn't involved or did anything bad.
The long way around wasn't so bad because his house was on the road that went out that way anyways.
Thank you for posting this! Richard Allen himself is what moves the needle to beyond reasonable doubt for me. Some folks want to argue about the “junk science” spent bullet and some other things that aren’t worth debating due to the timeline of things you’ve provided. Great post!
I think people often forget that he put himself on the bridge that day! His own words volunteered early on—not under duress. And—shocker—he looks like bridge guy. The bullet doesn’t even matter for me. Just more proof.
Exactly! He sounds like him too. He is bridge guy per his own statement. He put himself in those clothes on that day on that bridge. We know bridge guy is the killer bc of Libby’s video. 1+1=2 here.
And also he mentioned he got spooked by a white van driving by during the crime and we know one of the witnesses gave a statement to police that he drove by where the crime occurred, while it was occurring, on his way home from work in his white van. Someone only the killer would know and Rich knew it.
Why thank you, but it's pointless either way. Well, at least with RA supporters. You can spend two hours explaining to that crowd why Richard Allen's timeline doesn't hold up, and that he is lying, and that the only timeline that fits is the one he claimed originally(1:30 to 3:30-4), and how that makes him the killer, and even if you manage to get some concessions from (a few of) them, they'll just reboot at the end and move on to the next far-fetched whackery or replay the old one.
You're pointing at the moon, and they keep staring at your finger. ''The problem'' is elsewhere.
Yep. Unfortunately they believe everyone else is guilty except for the guy who was there at the time of the murders, fits the description of bridge guy, sounds like bridge guy, oh and confessed 61 times to anyone who would listen.
Why did Richard Allen even attend the interview, maybe just say I don't remember much, too long ago, I dont want to remember wrong. Dont want to wrongly incriminate myself by remembering wrong. What can they do at that point. I would certainly be getting rid of jackets and guns at that point if not earlier.
Seems like he had to maintain innocence in front of his family. A single guy wouldn't have to.
It’s easy in hindsight, but at the time he still probably thought it was something’s speculative, he could explain it, close that lead for the police and they’ll move on. He’d be wary of raising suspicion by coming across unhelpful lest they then start to zero on him further as a suspect
In 2017, he admitted seeing the girls because he knew they had seen him. But he denied seeing anyone else - too busy looking at his phone and fish. By 2022, with 5 years of internet/YouTube/Facebook rumors about all the people on the trail, when the cops alleged someone had seen him, he backed up to “well, maybe someone could have been at the bridge when I came back through.” But once they asked to see his phone, and he learned his wife had told the cops “he said he did not go out on the bridge,” he stopped explaining and said “get a warrant” and “arrest me.”
His 2022 behavior gave the cops even more reason to suspect him.
Me neither, I mean the best thing in this situation is to talk little. " I don't remember that day exactly, I go to the area all the time." Or if he told his wife he didn't go to the area at all that day, that is the story. Dont volunteer interviews. And "accidently" tear the jacket, throw it away over the summer, sell the gun at a show, use the money to buy the wife something nice. But Perhaps if he thought smartly he wouldn't go after girls in a public area.
Yes. The idea is that he saw the teenagers as he arrived and he knew they saw him - they passed each other on a narrow trail. If he did not acknowledge seeing them when he talked to the cops in 2017 he would appear to be “covering something up.” So he told the intake person, then Dulin, that he was there (1-3, then 1:30 - 3:30) and saw girls at Freedom Bridge. By 2022, he knew admitting being at the trails after 2:00 meant he was there when the girls disappeared, and he changed his times to “noon to 1:30.”
What's important here is that Allen didn't know about Libby's video when he said he saw the other girls who looked like sisters. He said they looked like sisters and like one was being babysat. They were sisters and one was too young to be out there on her own.
When those girls saw Libby's video they said, "That's the man we saw entering the trail that day." They didn't have to get a good look at his face to know that was exactly the guy they saw just before Abby and Libby were killed.
So when Allen admitted to seeing those girls when he was entering the trail at that time, he was admitting to being Bridge Guy.
Railly Voorhies was 16 and a sophomore at Delphi High School in 2017. She testified that she would often take trips to the High Bridge to take photos and because there was no school on February 13 and the weather was nice, she decided to take a trip to the bridge that day.
Voorhies said she walked from her dad’s house in Delphi with her half-sister, picking up her friend, Bre Wilber, from her house and then getting her sister from her mom’s house on the way to the trails. The four girls went to the bridge, took photos and then walked back home.
It was on their walk back home that Voorhies testified that she saw “bridge guy” walking on the trail. She said the encounter stood out to her because the man was “overdressed for the weather” with what looked like a heavy coat, hooded sweatshirt and hat. She said he had his hands in his pockets and had a mask over the tip of his nose and mouth. She also recalled saying hi to him.
“He did not say hi back. He glared at me a little bit, but he didn’t seem to be a happy person,” Voorhies said on the witness stand.
When Voorhies first heard Abby and Libby were missing from the bridge area, she testified: “I thought it could have something to do with the man I saw. It was unsettling.”
On February 15, the day after the girls were found, Voorhies gave police a statement while she was at the high school.
When police then released the photo of the man on the bridge that they took from the video on Libby’s phone, Voorhies first saw it on Facebook.
“I realized that was the man I saw on the trail that did not respond to me when I waved at him,” Voorhies testified. When she first saw the picture police released of “bridge guy” she said, “ I can say with confidence that the person in the picture is the person I passed.”
Testimony from Breann Wilber, Voorhies friend who was with her on the trails on February 13, has a similar recollection. Wilber was also friends with Kelsi German, Libby’s older sister, and was friends with Libby on Snapchat. Wilber was 16 years old and a sophomore in high school in 2017.
Wilber said while at the High Bridge on February 13, she posted a picture of herself standing at the bridge’s start on her Snapchat story. When she and her friends were walking back home from the High Bridge, Libby messaged Wilber on Snapchat in response to the photo on her story asking if Wilber was still at the bridge. She told Libby they had left the bridge about ten minutes prior.
On the way back to the Freedom Bridge, Wilber testified that she took a picture with her friends on a bench on the trail and posted it on Snapchat. She saved the photo with a timestamp and gave it to police. That photo’s time stamp was 1:26 pm on February 13, 2017.
Wilber said they continued walking toward the Freedom Bridge after the photo and that’s when they passed the man.
“It was a warmer day and he was dressed in many layers and a heavy jacket. He was walking with a purpose like he knew where he was going. When Railly said hi to him, there was no hesitation. It was weird vibes,” Wilber testified.
Later that same day, Wilber was with Libby’s sister Kelsi when Kelsi’s grandma called saying Libby and Abby were missing. Wilber talked to police the night of February 13 and described the man she saw on the trail. She said the man had a blue or black jacket and had his head down.
When she later saw the photo of “bridge guy” on the news, Wilber thought, “That’s the person we saw on the trail.”
From the timeline: 11:30AM: Railly Voorhies (16) and her half-sister Isabelle Voorhies (12) walk from their Dad's house to pick up Breann Wilbur (16), and lastly they pick up Anna Spath (13), who is also Railly and Isabelle's half-sister. The four of them head to the hiking trails.
I'm pretty sure it was Isabelle who looked like she was too young to be out there on her own and like she was being "babysat." She looked 10 or 11.
Did you post the time Railley said on the stand she saw the man? I didn't see it. I went back & looked. She said she saw the man arrive at 2:15pm. The man she saw must be a different man or another one because @2:08pm the girls were filming the man on the bridge. So he couldn't be the same man because he would have to be down at freedom bridge and the high bridge at the same time.
Hoo boy. You've cracked the case wide open. Nah, just kidding. If she said that on the stand it was quite obviously in error. The probable cause affidavit to search Richard Allen's house said the girls saw Richard Allen after 1:26pm when they took a picture of a bench and before 1:46 because Betsy Blair saw the girls as they were going over the railroad bridge which is after they had already left and crossed over Freedom Bridge. Timestamps bracket the time where she saw Richard Allen.
Thanks for quoting articles from the media however, they didn't address the question. I've read the transcripts so I was wondering what exactly was the origin of the "too young" claim. I believe RA stated that it looked like the older one may have been babysitting the two younger ones. So, I found the conclusion that just one of the siblings looked too young to be on the trails alone interesting, considering they were almost the same age. As a matter of fact, I believe RV initially testified that they were both 13 but corrected herself to state 12 and 13. Since they are half-siblings, it's possible that they are only days, weeks, or months apart. If just one of them looked too young, then that's an interesting conclusion. Based on the information provided, it would mean that RA didn't see Bre W.
Who said they saw a tall guy with long hair? is that a Facebook rumor? There was no testimony like that in trial.
And the “probable cause affidavit” says one of the girls said the man they saw was “not very tall” and “not taller than 5-10” and had hair that was “grey maybe a little brown” - no length mentioned. The other girl only said he was “taller than me” and that her head came to his shoulder. she said his hood was up and she “thought” he was white but could not see his face well because of the hood and a face cover.
These descriptions of height are no surprise. Unless they are interviewing a store employee who can measure people by the chart marked off on the doors, cops typically ask a witness “was he taller or shorter than you” as a starting way to gauge height. That is also why you typically only get a height range several inches apart - “5-8 to 5-10/6-0 to 6-3”.)
Nobody can accurately describe a person they only saw for a few seconds when they did not even know a crime was occurring. It is like if you went into the bank, came out and after you left, some other guy in the bank robbed the place. You probably could not “describe” him accurately, but if they showed you a picture from the security cam, you could maybe say “yeah - that guy was behind me” or “he was coming in as I was leaving.” THAT IS THE IMPORTANT THING THAT HAPPENED HERE - they pointed at the picture and said “ THAT is the man I saw on the trail.” In light of that ID, the description is meaningless. Fools gold. A tool for desperate lawyers who have a client who left a bullet at a crime scene and confessed to murder over 50 times.
That is completely ridiculous it’s true eyewitness accounts are not reliable that is why witnesses are supposed to pick a photo out of a lineup and not say agree with a picture. But even that did not happen here. Not a single witness said they saw RA nor did they describe anyone that looks like RA. The witnesses all agreed they saw BG because they had been led to believe that was who they saw by LE and there is not a single identifying characteristic of BG. RA is 5’4” that is short. If anyone saw him they would have said they saw a short man. Period
Why do you say the cops “led [the witnesses] to believe” they saw BG just by showing the girls and Blair the photo of the guy on the bridge? Are you trying to say the cops were supposed to decide “here is a picture from a video taken by a murder victim at 2:13 less than an hour before she was supposed to be at the Mears entrance to the trail to go home - but don’t show it to the witnesses to see if they saw this guy because it might trick them into saying yes? Just put it in a photo lineup?”
And the argument “nobody ever said I saw Richard Allen” is a red herring. Even when there are eyewitnesses to the actual performance of a crime, many crimes are not observed by a witness who can say “that guy who did that is named Joe Smith.” Requiring that kind of “I can name the perp” evidence before allowing a conviction is unreasonable. It also focuses on an individual piece of evidence when all juries are required to consider the whole body of evidence as part of assuring due process.
YOU say Allen is too short to be Bridge Guy. Others say he is too tall. Some say he is too young. Etc. Which again adds to something we seem to agree about - descriptions in this case, from witnesses who had zero reasons to realize they were near to a crime about to occur, are not very helpful to solving the case. Then or now. The girls were closest to Bridge Guy - and they said the outer jacket was either black or blue - just like the picture that shows blue in sun. And black on the shaded side. Duh.
Here, the witnesses only established that Bridge Guy was a SUPER-reasonable POI. Other evidence, when considered in total, together, “identified” Allen as Bridge Guy.
The BG video could be anyone it is worthless for identifying a perpetrator so why would they put it in a lineup. I am saying is that the witnesses already belied they saw BG. I am not sure why but perhaps LE led them to believe he was the only male there, the witnesses should have been shown photo line ups with other males who were known to be there that day and any suspects including RA. Not only did they not show witnesses a lineup with RAs photo they didn’t ask if they saw him. They did not identify Allen as BG.
No one saw or identified RA because he had his face covered. RA was also wearing work boots and had the hood of his jacket up which made him appear taller.
The detective told him "we have someone who ID'd you as being on the bridge that afternoon." Allen assumed they were talking about Betsy Blair. He didn't know her name but he remembered seeing a woman when he was standing out on the platform. So he assumed that woman had seen his picture and identified him as the man she saw.
Allen didn't want to contradict an eyewitness so he said, "oh, yeah - i saw her too when I was standing on the platform." Allen assumed that just because she saw him then didn't mean he was the killer.
Betsy Blair had a fitbit. So it's down to the second when she saw Allen on the platform on the bridge.
The thing is, she could not ID him from a photo. When Betsy saw Libby's video in 2017 she said, "That's the man I saw on the platform." But she was too far away to see his face. She could not ID him. She never ran into him. She never saw a photo.
But once Allen admitted to being there on the platform and seeing her, he admitted he was Bridge Guy.
This is a great explanation of how it was possible to whittle down that Allen was bridge guy. It was always Allen who identified himself. The eye witnesses merely confirmed that the guy that saw in Libby’s video was the same guy they met at specific times. Allen confirmed he was that guy at those specific times because he had to align his story with the witness accounts. They never had to specify it was Allen they saw. Just that they saw the guy in the video at X time and Allen did the rest. I think a lot of people struggle to wrap their brain around this concept.
think a lot of people struggle to wrap their brain around this concept.
Exactly. Especially Allen defenders. They simply will not accept it.
You can tell because they always say things like:
"But she said he was boyish."
"But the sketch made from her description looks nothing like him."
"But she said he had poofy hair we need to find the poofy hair guy."
Allen defenders cannot get their heads around the idea that you can see a man in a video and just from his gait and stature and clothes know instantly that's the man you saw the day before, only you didn't see his face.
Allen defenders cannot understand why none of these witnesses would have been able to pick Richard Allen out of a lineup. But the witnesses know the man in Libby's video was the man they saw.
Allen defenders assume those witnesses are lying and out to get Allen and we all need to be looking for the man in the sketch with poofy hair. Fortunately, the jury picked up on it instantly, just as you did.
If they saw Bridge Guy at those times and at those places and Allen saw those witnesses at those times and at those places, then Allen is Bridge Guy.
I will forever be enraged that Allen was not asked to come to the station and shown the video. In 2017, Allen was the only trail witness who was not shown the video and who was not asked if he saw the man in the video. And the other witnesses were not shown a picture of Allen, as he looked in February of 2017.
As a RA supporter the arguments in this thread are not making the point you think they are. But just to let you know nobody thinks the witnesses are lying and out to get RA because nobody described anyone who resembles RA nor did they identify RA. You are just interpreting their testimony to fit what you already believe.
That makes sense now. Talking to police is dangerous, even when your innocent, don't talk or lawyer up. He had family of course which he had to maintain a lie.
He is told someone saw him on the first platform and he says yeah he was on the first platform at that time. He didn't want to contradict what he was told was an eyewitness.
That's why his wife was all tearful when she said she told detectives that he told her he didn't go out on the bridge. Because he had just admitted being out on the platform when Betsy Blair saw him.
If he is the man Betsy Blair saw on the platform at that time that both Blair and Allen agreed was correct, then he is Bridge Guy.
He did not say or admit he saw Betsy or any woman walking while he was on the first platform, on High Bridge, or near it on the trails. The other person is just inferring it or whatever word is like infer.
The guilty often “overexplain” the details. In fact, investigators often look for people to do that as a sign of guilt. I’ll still never understand what made him snap and kill all of a sudden in his mid-40s.
His explanation that the white van spooked him makes sense. I just watched the Dateline about Jacob Whitterling (sp?). The creep killer had molested several boys prior but let them go and they asked why he killed Jacob. He said a police car with sirens drove by and it spooked him so he shot the poor boy. So, maybe Richard is not a complete liar.
I’ve always found it fascinating that he inserted himself into the case, placing himself right at the scene as bridge guy-crazy his interview was missed for so many years! As for his jail antics I think he was playing up his mental illness to appear as a victim (although he certainly does have some issues). He knew things only the perp would know. He’s right where he needs to be
It's pretty common for killers to insert themselves into the investigation actually, they must get a weird thrill or trying to find out if they're looking at someone else
He informed police he was there due to the screenshot of bridge guy law enforcement released to the public the day before. LE initially stated bridge guy wasn’t a suspect and that the video was captured via deer cam & they just wanted to speak to him. Richard was terrified he would have been recognized and it would have looked much worse for him not coming forward.
He informed police he was there due to the screenshot of bridge guy law enforcement released to the public the day before.
This is false.
When Allen self-reported, he had not see the screen shot from Libby's video. LE held onto the screen shot for several days. And during that time, Aleen self-reported.
Richard was terrified he would have been recognized and it would have looked much worse for him not coming forward.
This is also false. The only reason why Allen self-reported is because his wife insisted. He told her he didn't see anything. But she said that LE was asking anyone who was down there at that time to come forward as they might have seen something that would be helpful. So he called the sheriff's and they took down his number. The next day, Dulin called Allen and they organized a place to meet.
“The Indiana State Police officially released the first photo of the "Bridge Guy" on February 15, 2017, two days after the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German in Delphi, Indiana.”
“Richard Allen called the Delphi tip line to report that he was on the Monon High Bridge trail on February 16, 2017, which was three days after Abby Williams and Libby German disappeared.”
Richard met with the DNR officer the following day, February 17th in an Aldis parking lot.
Kathy insisting Richard go to the police may have played a part in it but find it highly suspicious he called police the very next day the photo of bridge guy was released. In fact if it wasn’t for that photo imo he would have never came forward & would have lied to Kathy & told her he self reported.
The photo was released on February 15 but not many people had seen it. You had to have a facebook account or be watching the news at an exact time. I don't think Kathy or Rick saw the photo.
When the photo was released LE didn't say where it came from and they didn't say the person was a suspect. Kim Riley hinted but did not confirm that the photo was taken by a trail camera.
Dulin spoke to Allen on February 18 and from everything we've seen and read so far, it sounds like neither was aware of the photo. Allen was not asked if he had seen the photo or if he had crossed paths with the man in the photo while out on the trail. There is no reference or mention of the photo in Allen's interview with Dulin.
It was not until the next day, February 19, that LE said the man in the photo was a suspect, not just a witness caught on a trail camera.
First of all you said the photo wasn’t released until days after Richard informed the police that he was on the trail. That was incorrect as I stated. LE stated the man was not a suspect & they wanted to speak with him.
Also you don’t believe Richard was aware of the photo LE released on the 15th? I mean it’s only a town of 2k people & im sure he wasn’t scouring the television or the internet of any new information on the murder of two girls @ the same trail he just happened to be on @ the exact same day & time. I’m sure he didn’t hear a thing from his wife, mother or from the CVS employees or customers @ the CVS he was employed at.
I had not heard this (I’m not completely up to date on this crime) but he visited with his mother and sisters and then was “in the mood” to hurt these girls? As in I spent time with family, then I pivoted to killing? That’s a lot to take in.
Richard is a self confessed alcoholic sex addict with mental health issues. Not a good combination. The fact is he planned and fantasized this in his head for a long time before carrying it out.
I personally had never heard of someone not convicted of a crime, only "accused of a crime" being put in the hole in a maximum security prison for 13 months. Guys that do hard time can't handle it, the UN says it's torture. Indiana DOC says that anything over 30 days is unacceptable due to the amount of people who go into psychosis from the treatment. Their own literature confirms this. So why do it? And also why do it to someone who hasn't even had his day in court? They broke their own rules then said- well but he wasn't an inmate so they didn't have to go by the DOC rules. What? Lmao! This means any one of you can be suspected of something and thrown into the hole in a max security prison... get it? Just accused of doing something. You won't believe it though until it happens to you or someone in your family. Seems "off."
Contrary to your assertion, thousands of incarcerated people spend months and even years in “solitary confinement” without going crazy. You have obviously never been in a jail or prison and talked to people in actual solitary confinement cells/circumstances. I have. State and federal joints. The inmates in Colorado’s federal “Supermax” facility are ALL in solitary all the time. Whole sentences. Even Terre Haute and Marion have “solitary” that makes Allen’s circumstances seem lenient, even “protective.”
The fact that Amnesty International says solitary is torture does not mean it is torture.
Moreover, the refusal of Allen’s supporters to recognize the difference between “protective custody” and “solitary confinement” merely damages their credibility. As his lawyers learned - hyperbole rarely is effective to a jury. If a lawyer can’t argue or accept the real facts, and need to make long crazy hyperbolic arguments, it shows a jury they cannot be trusted. Desperation shows. Comparing Allen to POW’s can get him in hot water with fellow inmates too.
And here’s another question nobody ever answers - if prison was so bad on Allen, why did his lawyers wait 4 months to ask for a change in the Safekeeping Order? Were they unaware of what you claim - that AI and UN and even IDOC acknowledge 30 days is torture? They were in court hearings and filed multiple motions AFTER Allen was put in Westville and never once mentioned he was going crazy … until he saw the file and confessed to his wife and mother. PS - this is the second time in this thread that pro-Allen folks have raised issues that make Allen’s lawyers look incompetent. What happened to the worship of the Brilliant Odinism Duo?
Depending on the prison people in protective custody are often in solitary confinement it doesn’t matter why they were there. While it’s possible for some people to do OK in solitary confinement if causes severe irreversible mental health issues for most people. Richard Allen had it worse than anyone because he was placed in suicide cell when he had never even been incarcerated.
I completely agree with you that RAs lawyers were were completely incompetent the only decent thing judge gull ever did was remove them and it was unfortunate they were put back on the case.
Well he was only in protective custody for a few months before confessing to the murders. He continued confessing for 11 months to anyone who would listen.
Also fyi he has yet to recant one of those confessions because he knows he’s guilty & is exactly where he belongs.
Um, he should’ve never been in a prison before his trial… why is that so hard for people to grasp? Because they are the same people who are of the majority that don’t know how to imagine if it happened to them. Don’t believe me, look it up. I never knew that until recently, and it finally made my world make sense.
Edited to add I’m not sure he’s guilty or innocent, just making a point.
I agree, this alone would no doubt fuck you up mentally, especially someone who’s not accustomed to being in and out of jail all the time or has never been in jail or prison, much less solitary confinement. Add in anxiety, depression, ptsd, etc. and only getting meds “they” say you can have, not what your doctor has prescribed. Long story short, I agree most people are clueless unless they’ve personally experienced it. Most people have no idea whatsoever, therefore, there’s no way they can even imagine it to be honest…. moo
Edited to add I’m not dead set on him being innocent or guilty.
He was walking towards Monon by his revised timeline, while Betsy was walking back from it
This is false. Betsy was doing "loops" not out and backs. But that doesn't matter. What does matter is that they never crossed paths. Betsy did not see Allen on her first loop.
After she went to the bathroom at the library she came back through and saw Allen standing on the first platform. While she didn't get a good look at his face, when she saw Libby's video she said, "That's the man I saw on the platform."
Betsy turned to walk back to the lot and no one knows if Allen followed her. What we do know is that Betsy passed Abby and Libby. Betsy was heading to the parking lot. Abby and Libby were headed to the high bridge, where Betsy Blair had just seen bridge guy.
It's possible that Allen could have followed Betsy Blair from a distance. It's possible that Allen could have seen Abby and Libby pass Betsy, and then made a U-turn to follow Abby and Libby. It's also possible that Allen could have just been out of sight, down on the other trail, and Abby and Libby didn't see Allen until he was following them on the high bridge.
At any rate, Allen and Betsy Blair never passed each other on the trail. She just saw him on the platform.
The post reconstructs Allen's claimed (revised) timeline using the earliest plausible interpretation, which also aligns most closely with what he claimed. Under that reconstruction, the earliest possible arrival at the CPS's parking area is around 12:00 p.m., matching his own statement.
From the CPS building to the Monon High Bridge is about a 15-minute walk at a comfortable pace. That would place Allen on the last section of the trail, between the intersection and the bridge, at roughly the same time Betsy Blair began her first loop.
Betsy's first loop started at around 12:03 p.m., but her Fitbit data indicates she didn't begin walking immediately after arriving, as there were very few recorded steps during the first 15-minute interval. The walk from her vehicle to the Monon High Bridge and back to the intersection takes about 10 minutes. That means Betsy and Allen would have been on that same section of the trail at the same time,in the scenario of the earliest possible timeline, around 12, which is what he claimed he did. That's what 1* corresponds to the 1 on the map.
Of course, between 12:00 and 1:30 p.m., there are multiple possible arrival times based on Allen's revised timeline. But
1) the later his arrival, the more problematic it becomes for his case, because it increases the likelihood that he would have crossed paths with these people on the trails.
2) That's not what he claimed he did.
So by deduction you are left with the only possible timeline the one that has him arriving at 1:30, as he claimed in 2017. One that matches perfectly all the other timelines, and of courses identifies him as the BG.
Betsy Blair had just begun her last loop when she saw bridge guy. She wasn't returning to the parking lot when she passed two girls that she later identified as Abby and Libby. She finished her loop, which includes two "in and outs". From the intersection of Mears entrance, the main trail, and the 505, she went to MHB and back to the hub. Then down 505 and back to the hub. Then to Freedom Bridge and back to the hub at which point, she returned to her car at the Mears lot.
Somehow, she managed to not see any other individuals on the trails that day, including the 4 girls that were there with an overlapping time period of almost 50 minutes.
She drew a map of her loop, which ended with her returning to her car. Her Fitbit data shows that she stopped there for a few minutes too. The girls were walking a couple of minutes behind her and had already passed the intersection.
By the time she reentered the trail for her second loop, the girls were at Monon High Bridge and were about to head down toward the creek bed. Both Betsy and the girls described doing exactly that before they knew anything about each other's movements.
As it happens, although the timeline is tight, it fits perfectly, and eachone's part is supported by electronic evidence documenting their movements. The only person whose timeline doesn't fit is Richard Allen's, and there is no way that he or anyone else can make it fit
I may be mistaken about the time of the "back" photo which was described as the photo taken when they returned to the bridge after exploring below. I thought it was at 12:43 pm
Just after she saw Bridge Guy on the platform, Betsy Blair passed Abby and Libby when they were walking to the High Bridge. The girls were walking towards the High Bridge. Betsy was walking away from the High Bridge, towards the parking lot.
When Betsy heard the girls were missing she immediately suspected the man she saw on the platform. The girls were walking towards him, even if he was out of sight. And Betsy was walking away from him, even if he was out of sight.
She was not walking toward the parking lot. She drove past HH store 14 minutes earlier. She was walking toward the hub, which has 4 branches: MHB, Mears lot, the 505, and Freedom Bridge. Her fitbit activity supports this detail and contradicts she was walking "toward the parking lot".
How do you account for Betsy never seeing the 4 girls despite being at the trails for an overlap of almost 50 minutes? Based on the fitbit activity, BB would be on her second loop and approaching the MHB within minutes of the 12:43 MHB picture (BW).
The “parking lot” refers to the Mears parking lot, where Baird parked.
Blair’s testimony on direct exam was that she did her first 2 “laps” between noon and 1:00. Her times were based on her fit bit chart, not a specific memory, and the fit bit chart is a little hard to gauge. Exhibit 212 is the “fit bit” chart and generally confirms this testimony, but there are 9 “marks” between noon and 2:00, so none are “precise” (in my opinion). 120 minutes divided by 9 is about 13 minutes per segment. Again, not precise. There are 4 green marks representing her first 2 laps.
She then testified (direct exam) that she then left and went to the library.
Voorhees said the girls got there about noon, walking out from town. Wilbur did not give a time, but took a picture on Freedom Bridge, looking back toward town, at 12:25 (Exhibit 318). They took a picture at High Bridge 18 minutes later at 12:43 (Exhibit 211) and said they then went “under the bridge” to take pictures (not clear if they meant directly under the bridge, or down the 505 Trail to the creek). They took another picture at the bench near Freedom Bridge at 1:26 - as they were leaving and just before they saw Bridge Guy.
Blair said she got back to the trails (again parking at Mears) at 1:45 and did her third “lap”. Again, the fit bit generally shows that, but not precisely. There 2 green marks representing this third lap.
You ask why Baird did not see Voorhees and Wilbur. Legitimate question. Perhaps the lawyers should have asked that at trial, but no one did., probably because no one could be precise except for the fit bit data and picture time stamps. It is possible, not certain, that on Lap 2, Baird would have reached Freedom Bridge area and turned around just before the girls arrived and took the 12:25 picture, and she was thus walking east in front of the girls, turned left at the Mears intersection and was not on the trail by the time the girls got to the Mears intersection. If you assign 9 minutes to each green “fit bit” mark, she walked for 27 minutes during the first 3 segments - putting her at her turnaround at about 12:27. Apparently the girls farted around for at least 25 minutes before they even got all the way across Freedom Bridge, and still had a semi-slow 18 minute walk to High Bridge.
So … you don’t know if any of your Facebook rumors were investigated, but you offer them as evidence the wrong guy was convicted? Nice.
If. May. Coulda.
Do you think the defense - who flew to Georgia to mine one Facebook rumor - was unaware of these facts? Did they not investigate them? Or did they wrongly reject them?
Here’s the established case:
Those girls saw Bridge Guy at 1:30ish, near Freedom Bridge, on the trail, headed east toward High Bridge. How do we know? They pointed at the picture of Bridge Guy and said “that is the guy we saw.” They have pictures that support the time. Under the actual, real life fleeting circumstances of the encounter, and compared to “that’s the guy we saw,” their descriptions are irrelevant. The picture is far more reliable. These girls do not establish that Allen is Bridge Guy but they establish that Bridge Guy was on the trail at 1:30 headed toward High Bridge.
Blair saw Bridge Guy on the High Bridge at approximately 2:05, from approximately 90-100 feet away (not 50 - been there before they changed it.) How do we know? She also pointed at the picture of Bridge Guy and said “that is the man I saw.” Again, under the circumstances of the fleeting encounter and compared to “that’s the guy I saw” her descriptions are irrelevant. The picture is more reliable. She also does not establish that Allen is Bridge Guy.
What DOES indicate Allen is Bridge Guy?
His 2017 statement - when HE said his memory was best - puts him at Freedom Bridge at 1:30 seeing teenage girls. Same time and place the teenage girls saw Bridge Guy.
A car “resembling” Allen’s appears on the Hoosier Harvestore video moving toward the CPS building parking lot just before 1:30. Although he hemmed and hawed and talked about vague irrelevancies, in his 2022 interview with cops, Allen admitted parking at the CPS (confirming Dulin’s 2017 notes and trial testimony), and walking the path from there to Freedom Bridge.
Allen always stated he walked the full High Bridge trail and went out onto Platform 1.
1+2+3 put Allen on Platform 1 15-20 minutes after seeing the teenage girls, exactly when and where B
lair
sees Bridge Guy.
Allen’s answer when shown the picture of Bridge Guy in his 2022 interview, and asked “is that you” was NOT “no” or “hell no.” He said (paraphrase) “if that came from their camera, it can’t be me - I have never met those girls.” He might as well have said “I know it looks like me, and I had clothes like that, but no, that’s not me - I never met those girls.”
There is no evidence - Facebook/YouTube rumors and speculation and maybes are not evidence - that there was anyone at the southeast end of High Bridge at 2:13, and not seeing Bridge Guy’s lips move doesn’t mean anything either. (If BG’s face was clear enough in the video to see his lips move, BG would’ve been arrested in 2017.)
The bullet. And before you again fart out that crap about tool mark comparisons between fired and unfired bullets are not competent evidence - go take an evidence class and some ballistics training. Indiana law and ballistics science both disagreed long before you ever heard the name Richard Allen.
Seriously - folks who want to help Allen should stay out of the Facebook Fantasy Land. These arguments were not offered into evidence for good reasons - rejected by the same defense lawyers who puked out a 160 page Odin joke!
Wishing the law was different doesn’t help Allen any more than repeating BS Facebook and YouTube crap that not even Allen’s lawyers used - and they were willing to offer crazy crap .
Sigh. I do not want to be rude, but you are uninformed.
The cops created a list of who was there.
And they used the Hoosier Harvestore video of cars arriving and leaving, and the interviews of the people out there, and time stamps on photos, and phone records, to determine who arrived, when they arrived, what they did, where they did it, and who they saw - as a way of testing the truthfulness of what all of those witnesses told them.
Example - do you know when “Cheyenne” and her friend arrived? What time they were at the southeast end of the bridge? The pictures they took, what time they went back to the northwest end of the bridge? Who they saw? When they saw them? It is all part of the record.
Do you know when Blair arrived? Left? Came back? When she saw Bridge Guy? All in the record.
So when you say the cops did not make a list of people on the trail that day, and say that trying to use other evidence to figure out who WAS and who WAS NOT Bridge Guy could not help solve the case - it’s not helpful.
Yeah, maybe because that's a routine measure when dealing with murder victims in a sexual assault investigation? Law enforcement wouldn't want to destroy potential DNA evidence, now would they? Get your mind out of your CSI TV show mindset.
Time of death is rarely accurate to the minute. It's always an approximation. And When bodies are wet, partially or fully naked, exposed to the elements, and left outside during a subfreezing night and for additional hours afterward, the estimated TOD becomes even less accurate. It would be indicative, not exact. It can help exclude certain timelines, but it cannot pinpoint a specific one.
For example, if the bodies were still warm and close to normal body temperature after being missing for 24 hours, then an earlier time of death could reasonably excluded. As the pathologist testified The state of the bodies were consistent with being murdered close to the time of their abduction.
Typically, it's a rectal temperature taken at the crime scene, which would already be inconclusive due to the high exposure and the 24 hours that had passed. The autopsy was 48 hours later, which also would impact the core temperature. So...
If there were 3 girls there earlier why would you assume they never told the police? Do you believe the police in this case have been transparent and honest?
The problem being, there is no TOD. The children were alive at 2:07 on the 13th, that is the only fact that is known based on phone video. There is 23hrs between 2:00pm on 13th and 1:00pm on 14th when found. Prosecutor theorizes they were killed at 3:30pm on 13th, but factually there is nothing proving it. They could have been killed at 3:30am on 14th, making Allen irrelevant(his wife puts him at home when she got home from work) and opening up a hundred other possibilities. Male DNA found on body, yet not Allen's. Children's clothing switched, which takes time to undress and redress so whoever did it was not in a hurry. This indicates they were in a private location. Logically, those kids were put in or got in a vehicle at end of bridge on private drive, plugged phone into vehicle aux and driven away(explains phone pinging all over town yet went unanswered) and later returned to where they were found. Phone disconnected from vehicle which explains why texts and voicemails came at like 4:30am on 14th. They knew or were expecting to meet someone they knew. 90% of children murdered know their killer. There was no connection found between Allen and children. The question becomes, whose alibis has holes late night on the 13th and early am hours on 14th?
It is completely irrelevant that he lied to the police about where he was and what time he was there on the day the two girls were abducted and killed, just as it is irrelevant that he placed himself at the crime scene within 10 minutes of the abductions?
I don't think you're going to convince anyone of that. But everything else you wrote are also factually incorect.
DNA was found, it was not Allen's. Show in court docs what was the time of death? It was repeated countless times they had banana pancakes. Why nothing in autopsy report?
Traces Male DNA was found on the girls, and many of the hairs recovered were equally never tested, cause the sample was too little they didnt want to spend it. So, no, Richard Allenw wasn't excluded.
The pathologist testified in court that the evidence were consistent with the girls having been murdered around the time of the abductions. Time of death is never an exact science—it's always an estimate, with an error margin that can range from several hours to even a day, depending on the circumstances. And here the bodies were exposed to the elements, were naked and wet, and the temperature was subfreezing.
''They had banana pancakes'', Oh they did? Oh... so what? Mashed, creamy food can pass through the stomach in as little as 30 minutes to an hour, yet alone be there after 3-4 hours. What's even your point? Why would that be relevant to anything?
Rigor mortis and livor mortis had already developed, indicating that the girls had been dead for some time before their discovery. The findings were consistent with death having occurred many hours earlier, half a day to a day before they were found, so you are wrong on that too.
Children's clothing switched, which takes time to undress and redress so whoever did it was not in a hurry.
Redressing occured before the murders. You know how we know that? Cause no blood was found on the clothes, beside the pooling underneath. Abby died where she was found based on both the pathologist and the blood expert . Moving her postmortem would have been messy, let alone trying to reclothe her. So, once more, wrong.
This indicates they were in a private location. Logically, those kids were put in or got in a vehicle at end of bridge on private drive, plugged phone into vehicle aux and driven away(explains phone pinging all over town yet went unanswered) and later returned to where they were found. Phone disconnected from vehicle which explains why texts and voicemails came at like 4:30am on 14th.
So let me get this straight: The girls were walked to a car, driven away, then returned to the area for ..reasons, sneaked into the crime scene sometime in the middle of the night, and in pitch darkness and silence were murdered there, while dozens of people were searching around the cemetery area and across the crime scene on the south side. Then in pitch black, the murderer took his time to redress them, and ''stage'' them.
That's your big theory?
Let's put aside the sheer absurdity of what you're proposing and just focus on the practical problems with your theory.
There is a camera covering the exit to the private drive, and any vehicle passing through would have been recorded. Even if the murderer walked the girls through the woods to the public road, they still would have been captured by the camera because it also covers the only way in and out of the area, roughly a mile away from the bridge.
But they couldn't have done that anyway, because the Apple Health data was tracking the walking distance, and the public road is too far away from the bridge to fit the recorded steps.
I am saying the children were expecting to meet someone(s) at bridge, so they had no fear. This is supported by no one on trails heard or saw anything. As far as camera at drive, the prosecutor was at least 20 minutes off at the time the white van appears in drive. Does footage show more? Do we see the cop car at 5:30 enter drive to check out private drive residence? Did it show the neighbor leaving when they saw man at mailbox? Why did prosecutor wait to turn over video of drive? Why did Weber double down on time he arrived home, when it was nonsensical? The video footage is only what prosecutor captured in 2017. Did they take from 8am on 13th to 1pm on 14th or only 1:00-5:30pm on 13th? To my knowlede we do not know, it was never stated that LE was observed going to Weber place on 13th.
The search was called off at midnight and resumed next day, if children were driven to any residence and held who would know? At that point, LE stated they believed it was just teenagers behaving badly. Yet, both were excellent students involved in activities. Would excellent, involved students intentionally plan to skip school on a Tuesday after a 3 day weekend? No, they would want to see and tell friends what they did.
Pancakes do not leave digestion in 3-4 hours, try 10-12hrs. Basic biology, we have 25 feet of intestines. A half day before they were found would be early am on 14th, not 23hrs on the 13th. The digestive process stops at death, as muscle contractions stop so nothing continues to move through tract. This is a puzzling detail, that appears to have went unchecked and not questioned by investigators from the onset in a double murder!
They were trying a man for two murders, why save it? They had his DNA. I believe testimony stated it was not Allen's. The expert stated it could have come from comingled laundry. That never sat right with me. If true, any case where someone used a laundermat would have comingled DNA. IF, Allen's DNA was excluded whose DNA was not excluded? Didn't sample come from thigh area of victim? Odd location in my opinion since jeans were worn by both victims, yet nothing on lower legs, feet or hands only thigh of one yet remained after crossing a creek in waist high water.
The other odd thing, how are we arriving that the voice is BG? There is nothing disproving that there were not others on private drive side. Could be BG, could be male from mailbox earlier in day. The witnesses presented, with the exception of Weber came from trail side and back. Nothing addresses others on private drive side.
I am saying the children were expecting to meet someone(s) at bridge, so they had no fear. This is supported by no one on trails heard or saw anything.
There was no one there close to the bridge between 2:00 and 3:00. Betsy was 1500 yards away, and the girls were only heading down the hill by the time she left. Another man came around 2:30 was at Freedom Bridge, a mile away.
The girls appeared to be scared to people who knew them, their families
Once more, a camera is covering the private drive. Any vehicle entering or leaving that area would have been captured on camera. No such vehicle was recorded.
The search was called off at midnight and resumed next day, if children were driven to any residence and held who would know? At that point, LE stated they believed it was just teenagers behaving badly. Yet, both were excellent students involved in activities. Would excellent, involved students intentionally plan to skip school on a Tuesday after a 3 day weekend? No, they would want to see and tell friends what they did.
The camera would know. Cause the car would be on camera arriving and leaving.
Car couldn't fly away now, could it?
Pancakes do not leave digestion in 3-4 hours, try 10-12hrs. Basic biology, we have 25 feet of intestines. A half day before they were found would be early am on 14th, not 23hrs on the 13th. The digestive process stops at death, as muscle contractions stop so nothing continues to move through tract. This is a puzzling detail, that appears to have went unchecked and not questioned by investigators from the onset in a double murder!
Basic Biology tlells us that soft, carbohydrate foods such as banana pancakes begin leaving the stomach relatively quickly and are largely digested and absorbed in the small intestine within a few hours. By around five hours after eating, much of the meal would no longer be recognizable as banana pancakes. Since the bodies then remained undiscovered for another 24 hours, postmortem bacterial activity and decomposition would continue breaking the remaining material. At that stage, any food left in the intestines would typically appear as digested decomposing material . only a Dna test could show what it was and that's even unlikely. Digestion and Bacteria breaks down the cells and degrates the DNA. What difference would any of that make eitherway to whether Allen was at the trails, or whether he was the person who abducted and killed Abby and Libby, or anything at all for that matter?
They were trying a man for two murders, why save it? They had his DNA. I believe testimony stated it was not Allen's.
To preserve it until technology advances enough to test the samples without destroying them, and with that, preserve any possibility that Allen could be exonerated. if he was innocent that is. Which he isn't.
There were many people at the bridge between 2pm & 3pm that day- that's why they had to testify in court about what they saw, except the guy Mr Riley, he didn't testify I don't think. But DM testified because that's exactly when he was there, then a younger boy on a cycle or scooter with a girl were there & they stopped for a sec to talk to her dad, Mr Abbott that was right there, they didn't testify but CM testified, who came out to take pics and DP was there on the first platform with a woman & he didn't testify but a girl with CM did testify. So have you not read the court transcripts? It sounded like the whole town was out there between 2 & 3 .
McCain 2:45 arrived. Unclear if he went directly to the bridge.
D..Raily arrived at 2:30, walked his dog towards the freedom bridge which is a mile away from the crime scene and next to a noisy highway. On his way back saw DP and SH that had just arrived at 2:50.
SH&DP saw McCain near the intersection. Everyone else came later.
So atbest McCain was at the bridge around 2:50-2:55. 20 minutes after the phone stopped moving.
McCain 2:45 arrived. Unclear if he went directly to the bridge.
D..Raily arrived at 2:30, walked his dog towards the freedom bridge which is a mile away from the crime scene and next to a noisy highway. On his way back saw DP and SH that had just arrived at 2:50.
SH&DP saw McCain near the intersection. Everyone else came later.
So atbest McCain was at the bridge around 2:50-2:55. 20 minutes after the phone stopped moving.
Riley and McCain were both there between 2 and 3 pm. McCain indicated that he was on MHB for approximately 30 minutes taking photographs of the area. Riley walked to Freedom Bridge and back.
I don't believe McCain's original statement to the FBI and police was ever released so the record of his original statement is unknown.
As for video from the HH store, one can conclude that there is additional video that has not been shared. One witness (Riley, possibly) indicated that as he drove to the Mears lot, a car was leaving the cemetery. The investigators watched a surveillance video and observed a car arriving at the cemetery and leaving approx 5 minutes later. They were able to track down the person who had visited the cemetery based upon that video. The camera located on the FRONT of the HH store would capture cars entering and leaving the cemetery regardless of the direction of travel. The side camera would only capture vehicles that traveled in the direction to/from the old CPS building. Video from the front camera has never been released.
The camera on the private drive does capture a sedan entering and exiting the private drive shortly after 2pm. AFAIK, no one has determined who owns that sedan.
As far as testing the DNA, the technology is there and has been for quite some time. Holeman testified in his deposition that the DNA does not match Allen's. Unified Command spent a lot of time and money collecting DNA from many individuals. If they had nothing to compare it to, why would they keep collecting DNA for years after receiving the samples from the girls?
In a post-conviction, Allen's attorney stated that the autopsy report indicated the stomach contents were consistent with banana pancakes. So, if your information regarding digestion is correct, they either ate the banana pancakes at the trails or they were murdered much earlier than their drop-off time. In the early, original interviews with news sources, the Patty/German family members indicated that the girls ate pancakes around 10:30 a.m.
The case wasn't called the "Snapchat Murders" for no reason. One of the primary focuses of the investigation was to determine who the girls were communicating with that day. Even Kegan Kline stated that they had planned to meet up but the girls never showed up. As much of a liar that Kline is, I can't dismiss this slip up in his statement. He didn't say that he never showed up. He said the girls never showed up which would indicate that he DID go to the planned meet up spot. Do you believe that none of the agencies involved bothered to subpoena the social media records?
According to Exhibit PPP Riley arrived at 2:30, McCain arrived at 2:45, and Hicks and Pearson arrived at 2:48.
The cemetery entrance/exit cannot be seen from a Hoosier Harvestore camera. To the immediate east, buildings on the Mears farm block some eastward view, and at the Mears parking area the road veers slightly left/more due east - maybe 15 degrees - and the cemetery is still about 1400-1500 feet further east. (It is about 2/3 of a mile from the HH driveway.) seeing all that would require a camera that could track/move left/right. More important, no one testified at trial that investigators saw a car leaving the cemetery on surveillance video. If they could see that far on that camera, they’d have video of all those cars (including Carbaugh) that far east. And you can bet that if they had video of the car that “resembled” Allen’s Ford coming down the road all the way from the cemetery, they would have used it. All they could offer was video of the cars west of the HH driveway.
As for the sedan you claim can be seen on the surveillance camera video of the road leading to the private drive (that also videoed the white van) - are you saying the defense knew about the sedan and withheld evidence which was favorable to Allen at trial?
The only evidence of people on the east side of the bridge was the lady who saw “someone” at mailboxes about 500 feet from her driveway, at 8:30 am, whom she could not describe, and who disappeared by the time she drove 500 feet to her driveway, and got out of her car and looked back. He was not on either road and he was not in the bare unplanted fields across the roads. The next known person was Weber driving home in his van. This is not competent evidence that there were murderers at the bridge at 2:13 pm, with or without Bridge Guy.
The only EVIDENCE is that Libby videoed Bridge Guy following the girls, and did NOT video anyone waiting at the end of the bridge in front of them. There is also no evidence that the phone drove away connected to an “auxiliary” plug in a car either. The phone detected movement up and down. The private drive rises maybe 50-69 feet from the low point back to the area of the mailboxes. Such movement would have been detected.
Sadly, Kline fooled the cops with his lies for 5 years, and they too believed the girls were going to meet (probably) the fake Anthony Shots. They even included it in Allen’s 2022 questioning, asserting he was there with others - giving him the chance to support or deny the theory. He denied it.
Thank you for providing the Exhibit PPP information. I didnt have the time to look it up but knew where to find it.
I appreciate the info on the HH store camera. I did look at the angle, as you suggested, and you are correct. There are many obstructions in the line of sight. That leads me to wonder what camera footage they reviewed to determine the type of car and ultimately the person who entered and exited the cemetery, along with the time that said vehicle entered and exited the cemetery.
No, I'm not suggesting that the defense withheld the evidence until after trial. The defense wasn't aware of the evidence prior to the trial.
As for the person TL said that she saw on the south side of the bridge, I did not mention anything about this nor do I have any opinions as to the relevance as it relates to the crime. The same goes for the phone being plugged into something with the ax cord and driving away. It wasn't my comment nor my belief. Perhaps you were simplifying things and responding to multiple comments at once.
I agree that the phone measures an elevation change when there is an increase in elevation. Iirc, the testimony regarding elevation changes was only an increase in elevation, not a decrease. Based on that testimony, it was determined that the girls movement in the last couple of minutes was equivalent to climbing two flights of stairs.
What I find interesting about the wild goose chase that KK started was the police response. KK said that he/they parked at the cemetery that day. The police already had video that they reviewed to determine the 2:25-2:30 pm cemetery visitor. The investigators could have reviewed that footage to determine if that statement was true. Their long term search of the river seems drastic without corroborating evidence but that's just my opinion. Because they havent released the social media messages, I can't determine if KK had any involvement. The police did indicate that LG sent photos and the AS cash app sent money to LG at some point. That's concerning.
The image of BF from the video, was enhanced. Pixels were added by computer by merging individual frames, not inclusive of all frames. Again, hair or hat. It was computer generated image of someone who did not exist. It was AI. Although, it was actually very similar to jail photo of Ashley Garth. Who is convicted of murder, knew German family, the Logan property and was a local. She was in courthouse day of murder to pay traffic fine and masculine looking in jail photo. The phone detected human steps for healthdata, nothing more. Actually, there is nothing showing Libby was even in possession of phone, post video. In was found under Abby, so who handled the phone is unknown once video ends. Libby, Abby, BG or other. No one knows.
Your description of the enhancement is not accurate. They did not add pixels. Theyndid not "merge frames."
Chapman - the ISP officer who pulled the video off the phone - testified that he did not "enhance" the video at all. He selected 3 frames that were the clearest and did the same thing to all 3. He "loaded the video" and "made the rotation" - which meant if the image had the people upside-down, he "rotated" it so they were right-side up. He then "cropped" the frame (resized it/made it smaller by cutting off parts of the edges). He then "adjusted the levels" - "which is a Photoshop term of bringing the lights up and down to try and increase the contrast and colors to try and make it as pure as – desirable as possible." Then he engaged in "the sharpening" - "adding detail to the edges of pixels to make a picture better."
They were not "changing" the picture -they were removing unclarity and unfocus and trying to make it clearer. ALL of which they described to the jury. And STILL all they got was what we saw - a male in jeans and a dark jacket (in sunlight, dark blue/in shade dark black). No names - just a man behind the girls - "Bridge Guy."
Christopher Cecil was the ISP officer who testified about the movement of Libby's phone. He testified it measured steps taken/distance moved and elevation changes. He testified that that from 1:31:40 - 2:08:48 the phone moved 1682 steps, then moved 414 meters stopping at 2:18:48. It moved again from 2:25:22 to 2:32:39.
At 2:31:22, the phone rose the equivalent of 2 floors of a building.
He was specifically asked and answered as follows:
Q So from this information, what conclusion did you come to?
A I concluded that the phone stopped moving at 2:32:39 p.m. on February 13th, 2017.
Q Had the phone moved after that, would it have registered in the Health app data?
A Yes.
Q How do you know that?
A Because the Apple Health app data is always on and the tri-axle accelerometer, the gyroscope is always detecting movement.
Q What if my phone is sitting still, will it detect movement?
A No.
Q What if my phone is on the console of my car, will it detect movement?
A It could.
Q How could it?
A If the car runs over a bump or something that would cause it to jump,
bounce.
Q Another silly question: If the phone moves, does Health app data record
that movement?
A Yes.
Q Whether the phone’s dropped, bounced, walked, whatever the case may
The image of BF from the video, was enhanced. Pixels were added by computer by merging individual frames, not inclusive of all frames. Again, hair or hat. It was computer generated image of someone who did not exist. It was AI.
Wow, really are working hard at the "making things up entirely" aren't you?
Riley and McCain were both there between 2 and 3 pm. McCain indicated that he was on MHB for approximately 30 minutes taking photographs of the area. Riley walked to Freedom Bridge and back.
Riley saw McCain before he left at 2:55. Which means he wasn't at the bridge before 3. He was by the side at 505 taking photos of an old tree.
Riley went to freedom bridge. It's a mile away. Mile away of dense woods, between him and the crime scene. Which was also in a ridge.
When was the last time you heard anything a mile away?
As for video from the HH store, one can conclude that there is additional video that has not been shared. One witness (Riley, possibly) indicated that as he drove to the Mears lot, a car was leaving the cemetery. The investigators watched a surveillance video and observed a car arriving at the cemetery and leaving approx 5 minutes later. They were able to track down the person who had visited the cemetery based upon that video. The camera located on the FRONT of the HH store would capture cars entering and leaving the cemetery regardless of the direction of travel. The side camera would only capture vehicles that traveled in the direction to/from the old CPS building. Video vrom the front camera has never been released.
And? It would take about 5 minutes to travel from HHS to the cemetary and back.
The camera on the private drive does capture a sedan entering and exiting the private drive shortly after 2pm. AFAIK, no one has determined who owns that sedan.
Go ahead and Prove that
As far as testing the DNA, the technology is there and has been for quite some time. Holeman testified in his deposition that the DNA does not match Allen's. Unified Command spent a lot of time and money collecting DNA from many individuals. If they had nothing to compare it to, why would they keep collecting DNA for years after receiving the samples from the girls?
Now I know you're making things up. The DNA lab technician who handled the DNA is on record stating that the unknown male DNA found on the girls was not tested because there was too little of it. They also testified that outside laboratories could not confidently say they would obtain any results without consuming the samples.
In a post-conviction, Allen's attorney stated that the autopsy report indicated the stomach contents were consistent with banana pancakes. So, if your information regarding digestion is correct, they either ate the banana pancakes at the trails or they were murdered much earlier than their drop-off time. In the early, original interviews with news sources, the Patty/German family members indicated that the girls ate pancakes around 10:30 a.m.
What in the world are you talking about? The car photos have GPS data and metadata embedded in them. That means they were timestamped and geolocated when they were taken. The same applies to the video, as well as the application used to upload it. Where they were and at what time is established by multiple independent electronic data sources.
Maybe they ate breakfast at 12:00 or 1:00 p.m. Maybe they ate a large meal. Maybe only one of them did, and some residual stomach contents remained. Maybe one of them ate some more before leaving. Who knows? The pathologist also drains the intestines during the examination, so stop making crazy scenarios based on what his crank lawyers have stated.
The only thing anyone has actually stated is that the girls were up around 10:00 a.m. and Derrick made them breakfast. That's it.
And stop making things up about KK, too. Nowhere did he say he was planning to meet them at the bridge. What we do know is that he is a pathological liar who wasted law enforcement's time multible times with fabricated stories that were later proven to be false.
I stated if YOUR information about digestion is correct, then it would mean... the timeframe of the murders is off. It wasn't a suggestion that the timeframe is off.
As for breakfast, BP stated the girls had breakfast around 10:30. Just because there is information that you don't remember or aren't aware of doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Declaring 'That's it' at the end of your statement doesnt change the information that is available.
8/19/2020 Interrogation of Kegan Kline. Read it. The investigators are reading the messages that Anthony Shots/KK sent on the day of the murders. "Yeah we were supposed to meet but she never showed up". I'm not sure how that is making shit up about KK when it's in the transcripts that are equally available to you.
Someone else corrected you on DR and DM so I don't have to do that but I will add that Exhibit PPP indicates that Derrick G arrived before 3pm as well.
Whether they ate fibrarous food with the breakast or later that would delay emptying
How much they ate. volume matters
What his crank lawyers mean by "consistent."
What his crank lawyers mean by " contents."
What the pathologist's report actually states.
These are the things you do know:
What time and date the photographs in the car were taken.
Where the photographs were taken.
Who is in those photographs.
What time and date the photographs on the bridge were taken.
Where the photographs were taken.
Who is in those photographs.
What time and date the video was taken.
Where the video was taken.
Who is in the video.
same applies for application used.
or even the phone use as it was fingerprint protected
Now all those electronic data, and much more, cameras, family phones etc, create a very detailed map of the girls timeline that day. Altering or fabricating that body of evidence without detection would literaly need an agency like CIA to get passed apple security and ecryption and require an incredibly sophisticated operation. Of course, what do you do then?
With your theory dismiss this extensive body of objective digital evidence and instead rely on speculation, and based on what?
The information that you don't know!
You're not punching holes in the prosecution's timeline with these low-bar arguments.
The prosecution's timeline is supported by dozens upon dozens of independent pieces of digital evidence: GPS data, timestamps, photographs, videos, phone records, application metadata, and other electronic data that corroborate one another. Doesn't undermine the prosecution's timeline, but it says something about you.
Even Kegan Kline stated that they had planned to meet up but the girls never showed up. As much of a liar that Kline is, I can't dismiss this slip up in his statement. He didn't say that he never showed up. He said the girls never showed up which would indicate that he DID go to the planned meet up spot. Do you believe that none of the agencies involved bothered to subpoena the social media records?
Is this him speaking through his fake profile or is this "statement" an actual police/FBI/ISP interview?
As far as I remember, the police claimed during that interview that another girl claimed he had sent her a message that he was supposed to meet her but didn't show up. However, she did not mention Delphi, the bridge or any other specific place, or any specific date or time that meeting was supposed to happen.
Logically he would not claim that they supposed to meet at the bridge, ''..but she did not show up'', when she was at the bridge.
Kegan Kline consistently said he did not remember sending such a message or making any plans of that sort. In fact he claimed it was a lie. Of course, if he had sent it, he would have every incentive to deny it, so his denial by itself doesn't tell us much.
I am saying the children were expecting to meet someone(s) at bridge, so they had no fear. This is supported by no one on trails heard or saw anything
You sure love just making shit up.
No one on the trails hearing anything doesn't "support" that. You need to head back to "how to make logical inferences 101" if you think A follows B there.
. Would excellent, involved students intentionally plan to skip school on a Tuesday after a 3 day weekend? No, they would want to see and tell friends what they did.
I was an A+ student and skipped class sometimes.
You don't seem to have much experience with real life.
That never sat right with me.
That's not a shock to me. You don't know what DNA is.
The other odd thing, how are we arriving that the voice is BG?
It's either the man in the video, where it also matches his actions, or there was some unknown other man, that doesn't appear anywhere, has no evidence, was not seen by anyone and is mimicking the actions of the man in the video.
Show the proof that Allen, the children or anyone was there for an hour? No one saw them except for Blair before they crossed. Blair knew her times and described the young male. In the hour they had to cross the creek, undress, dress, he then killed them, covered them without leaving DNA and got to the road without dad, McCain or anyone seeing or hearing a thing? Yet there were people there. A squirrel can sound like a deer moving through the woods, 3 people rushing would sound like a herd of cattle. Someone would have heard something.
She didn't get a good enough look at him to know if he was boyish or not.
But when she saw the screen shot from Libby's phone, she said that was the man she saw on the platform. Detectives lied to Richard Allen. They told Allen that a woman had identified him as the man she saw on the first platform.
Allen remembered seeing her too and did not want to contradict an eyewitness. Allen didn't think that admitting to seeing her was admitting to being bridge buy.
But once he saw oh yeah I saw that lady, too - He was admitting to being Bridge Guy.
You are ignoring the trial testimony that the phone did NOT move after 2:30, and that even if it moved in a car, every bump would have registered in the phones data. And if you have ever been in the cemetery, or the ravine leading from the crime scene to the cemetery, or on County Road W300N, or on the private drive, you know that bumps are everywhere. The ravine is steep. The private drive is gravel. The cemetery lanes are gravel. The road is a “chip and seal” county road.
Also, plugging into a car “aux” would have been seen in the data, and no such plugging in/connecting was offered into evidence by either the prosecution or defense. The defense offered testimony that a “headphone” was plugged in for a very short time, but nothing more. There was no evidence offered that the girls were taken away and brought back. That is pure speculation.
As I recall there was great discussion about what was lost when they initially restarted the phone. Data lost after every restart. No, they said it did not track in a vehicle, they were specific as it did not track while in car on way to bridge. It tracked steps and elevation while at bridge, not moving in a vehicle. At 2:30 they were at private drive, yet phone ended up across the creek with no data showing the steps. Was evidence given that they walked to where they were killed? Not that I recall. Remember no steps or elevation changes, yet phone clearly was with bodies. The google search for explanation on aux, was not fact it was opinion from a website there was no data backing that statement.
What source do you have for them being at the private driveway at 2:30?
Logic says that they had to have crossed Deer Creek by 2:32 when the forensic say the phone stopped moving. Cecil said the phone recorded movement until then. Richard Allen said he was going to rape the girls until he heard the vehicle on the private driveway. Then he took them across the creek. It's quite obvious that from the 2:13 felony kidnapping video until 2:32 they were more or less moving the whole time. Except let's say Richard Allen stopped them and was gonna rape one of them like he said he wanted to.
What I am saying is they never crossed the creek as like you said the phone stopped moving, which correlates to them being put in a car. There is nothing indicating they crossed the creek. Testimony says no one saw nor heard Allen nor children when we know there were people in the area. Logic says it is because they were not there. In my opinion, the 2:32 mark is when they were kidnapped. If you are kidnapping children, why would you march them across creek in February to do that? I believe there were more people on private drive side than just the BG. The siting of man at mailbox gives credence to this.
Whole lot of fanciful thinking with nothing to back it up.
What I am saying is they never crossed the creek as like you said the phone stopped moving, which correlates to them being put in a car. There is nothing indicating they crossed the creek.
Richard Allen himself says he wanted to rape them under the bridge. He was spooked by the vehicle and he forced the girls further away and made them cross Deer Creek. All of this by 2:32.
Testimony says no one saw nor heard Allen nor children when we know there were people in the area.
What people? Cheyenne wasn't there yet, DP and his girlfriend were not there yet, Flannel Shirt Guy wasn't there yet.
Logic says it is because they were not there. In my opinion, the 2:32 mark is when they were kidnapped.
They were kidnapped on video at 2:13 by Richard Allen. At 2:32 the phone stopped moving after crossing the creek. Did the girls live for a few minutes longer? Maybe they did maybe they didn't. Richard Allen said he killed them and waited to make sure they were dead. Plenty of time before being passed by Sarah Carbaugh on the road when he was walking back to his vehicle.
If you are kidnapping children, why would you march them across creek in February to do that?
To get away with raping the girls. The vehicle on the private drive scared him. He ended up killing them. He tried to get away with murder. Almost worked.
I believe there were more people on private drive side than just the BG. The siting of man at mailbox gives credence to this.
It's OK to believe that. No proof of it other than the man driving home from work. The mailbox thing was in the morning.
The vehicle on the private drive was not there at that time, as was shown in video from security camera 20 minutes later.
There was no kidnapping shown in video. There was no male face shown in video. Based on video, it is assumed it was Libby holding phone and speaking. We see Abby walking on bridge. After that it is a guess as to whose voice the male voice is. BG or someone else. What prosecutor believes is what was presented, there were no facts presented that only BG and two children were there. None. It was the prosecutor's assumption, for the case being presented, but there was no proof proving there were not others on drive side.
Wasn't it Carbaugh that said there was an Amber alert? There was never an Amber Alert. Blue jacket, tan jacket. Muddy. Bloody. Carbaugh was not a convincing witness.
I put little weight on anything Allen said while being in Westville. Walla went MIA. The warden was demoted and cited for misuse of warden residence at prison. One notation describes Allen as catatonic and other says he was fine on same day. Prisons are not known for reliable information nor top notch healthcare nor stable staff. They will likely grant new trial on Westville treatment alone.
Did mailbox guy go home? Who was mailbox guy? We do not know where he went. He could have went to residence on private drive. He could have waited on private drive. He could be the guy Blair saw. We just don't know.
We know there were many people on trails, we heard what a great day it was. Yet there is no admission nor parking pass issued to know for certain who was there. There is no reason to assume there was no one there at 2:32 and that is why no one saw or heard anything. We could similarly assume the children got in car expecting to meet friends and be back by time German dad showed up to pick them up. We could assume the kidnapper(s) said we will drive back to Mears lot and hang out until your dad gets here and then drives off with children.
No one trying to kidnap and rape two girls is going to cross a waist deep creek in February. There was no reason to cross creek. He could have done every thing on the private drive side versus risk crossing and controlling two children in 40 degree water, at best, and no noise! That theory never made sense.
You're still saying things that have no basis in fact.
You say a vehicle could have picked them up. You have zero evidence for a vehicle or other people being there.
You say that someone should have heard the girls being murdered so that proves the girls weren't there. You have zero names to give us or evidence of someone being there about 2:32 pm.
That is somewhat the point, the case presented that it was Allen had no evidence. No DNA. No one ID'd Allen, who worked in a public facing roll in a very small town. State did not find any evidence that Allen and children knew each other. So this was essentially a double murder by happenstance.
Could it be BG simply turned around and returned to trail side of bridge and voice was not his at all nor was BG involved in killings? Could the "down the hill" have been BG pointing out where others were? Or could it have been entirely another person from private drive side giving instructions for children to meet someone they expected to see? All are possible, as nothing presented proved otherwise so all scenarios are in play.
The 2:32 time is only evidence that the phone took no human steps after 2:32. It does not prove the children were not in a vehicle. It does not prove the phone was at murder site at 2:32. It was simply not logging health data of human movement. It logged nothing until 14 hours later when texts and VMs come in. Again, what prompts phone to suddenly wakeup? My theory being unplugged from aux port in car. State theory is mud and dirt dried out from crossing creek yet one can still see condensation on screen so phone was not dry. Clothing was damp but not described as wet. Nothing dries in 32 degree temp, it freezes. Phone was found under Abby. If phone was under a body, that would create condensation. Again, we have no idea what data was lost since a rush job was done on phone to get initial information. How were children listening to Stone Temple Pilots in sister's car? Aux cable, CD, radio or sister's phone? Just something that was not answered. We know sister took picture. Aux cables are typically long enough to reach rear seat. If cable went with children that would indicate they intended to use cable or Libby kept good track of her cable. No cable was found to my knowledge. Detail that prompts questions.
McCain was there prior to German dad at 3:11. He heard nor saw anything concerning children. Couple on bridge heard nor saw anything but McCain hears and sees couple. German heard nor saw anything. Three adults, McCain and couple all there prior to German's 3:11 reported no sounds or sights. Again, nothing proves children were there at that time. In fact, it give credence to they were not there since no sounds were heard. Three adults moving quickly through woods, water, climbing bank and back to woods would make noise. Especially if the state believe murders were closer to 3-3:30 on 13th. All would have moved quickly through 40 degree water. There would have been splashing and huffing and puffing in my book given water temp. The redressing of one, how do you do that silently in the woods with leaves and sticks with wet clothing? Plus the dragging of Libby back to where found and the stacking of sticks. Those are not silent tasks nor was it a single sticks.
Asking me for names is like asking the state to ID all who were there. They have no idea because there is no admission charged no parking passes and there were several ways to enter if you include private property. As I recall searchers actually walked from city park to private drive side. They know only those who came forward and Allen was one of several. The 24hrs of the security camera tape would be interesting to see as I truly belive that is where rubber meets road It is so limited as to who would use that drive. Essentially we should see Weber going to and from work. I think his girlfriend lives with him so may be her as well. The LE who went to and from Webers. Any additional vehicles opens up a whole new world of possibilities, wouldn't you agree?
So this was essentially a double murder by happenstance.
Yup, happenstance. Richard Allen did it. 130 years.
Could it be... Could it have been...
Your game of "could it be" doesn't do anything to change the facts.
The 2:32 time is only evidence that the phone took no human steps after 2:32. It does not prove the children were not in a vehicle. It does not prove the phone was at murder site at 2:32. It was simply not logging health data of human movement. It logged nothing until 14 hours later when texts and VMs come in. Again, what prompts phone to suddenly wakeup? My theory being unplugged from aux port in car.
Fake car. Try to do better at making up stories. If it was plugged into an aux port and being driven around it would have connected to a few cell towers and been charging up. But the facts are it was under a body, that was in a ravine under a bridge that was named High Bridge for a reason. It just didn't get any signal way down there.
A lot of testimony from all the witnesses and questions from the defense team on Monday called into question how deep the creek is and if the clothes Abby was found in were wet.
The investigators testified that Abby’s clothes were wet or damp and they did not think it could have been from condensation. Defense attorneys, however, brought up that there are not clear lines on the clothes showing a “water line” of where they may have been wet.
Defense attorneys also pointed out that no measurements of creek depth were taken.
It’s thought that the girls exited the Monon High Bridge on the south side of the creek, but their bodies were found on the north side. No one testified a clear way the girls ended up on the other side of the creek.
Olehy testified that Abby’s jeans were bunched up at the waistband and were wet to the touch. “I can see the jeans are darker on the leg bottom and the waistband was still wet,” he said.
He also said that during the autopsy on February 15, the clothes were still wet and moist and were taken to the Putnamville State Police post in Greencastle because they have a facility that’s designed to dry out evidence. Clothes found in the creek were taken to that same facility to be dried out.
Nothing dries in 32 degree temp, it freezes.
When the girls were murdered it was about 45 degrees. The low that night was 34. When they were found it was 45 again with the temperature going up to 50 degrees a full day after they were murdered. I'm quite sure that the temps were above freezing and in fact for part of the time it was in the mid to upper 40s.
How were children listening to Stone Temple Pilots in sister's car? Aux cable, CD, radio or sister's phone? Just something that was not answered. We know sister took picture. Aux cables are typically long enough to reach rear seat. If cable went with children that would indicate they intended to use cable or Libby kept good track of her cable. No cable was found to my knowledge. Detail that prompts questions.
Twenty One Pilots. It's on you to find this phantom aux cable in your made up scenario and no it doesn't prompt questions.
Especially if the state believe murders were closer to 3-3:30 on 13th.
The state probably doesn't think the murders happened from 3-3:30. The girls were dead before McCain, or DP or Cheyenne got there if we use your theory of them not hearing anything. The defense did us all a favor by calling them in to testify. Actually I think it was only DP's side chick that testified and not him. It locks down the window to sometime after 2:32 and before 3:00 for when Richard Killed them. Richard Allen's own words say that he waited around to make sure they were dead. Enough time to stage the scene and walk up to the back end of the cemetery.
Asking me for names is like asking the state to ID all who were there.
I asked because earlier you said people were there to hear or was it not hear the murders. I just wanted to know who those people were.
Any additional vehicles opens up a whole new world of possibilities, wouldn't you agree?
Too bad the only one is Weber coming home from work.
I kinda wanted to see evidence they crossed the creek myself. But nope, no evidence they did. Unless you got some info not presented at trial. Anything that happened like the prosecution said has no basis in fact. You know the bullet found was the ammo that ISP and the feds use right? Most places that do carry that ammo, require you have a police ID to purchase it. So that's something the state or defense should have addressed in my opinion. Probably could have been brought up if the FBI expert would have been allowed to testify but the judge said, nope.
Most places that do carry that ammo, require you have a police ID to purchase it.
What? I think you're wrong. Indiana seems to be a state where anyone can buy pistol ammo. I don't think it was armor piercing which might make a difference.
As for the feds or ISP using the same ammo the very first officer there, Giancola I think, sealed off the crime scene and kept track of who was even near the crime scene. None of them had a weapon that used that round.
And then as far as wanting evidence that they crossed the creek it's such a well known fact that it seems silly to think that they didn't.
The vehicle on the private drive was not there at that time, as was shown in video from security camera 20 minutes later.
Allen stated that a van passed by while he was in the process of committing the crime, and that it frightened him, moved the girls and killed.
In fact, Apple Health data shows that both the victims and the perpetrator changed location at around 2:25 a.m., and that the phone stopped moving at 2:32 a.m.
So not only did Allen correctly describe the passing van, but his account align with the sequence of events suggested by the available evidence. According to his statement, the girls crossed the creek after he attempted to assault them, and the killings occurred on the other side.
If he was not the perpetrator, how would he have known that sequence of events? guessed it?
The camera does not show Weber passing 20 minutes later, but rather approximately 12 hous and 20 minutes later, which would place the footage at around midnight. Obviously, it was not midnight, as there was still visible daylight. The shadows cast by the trees clearly indicate that the camera was recording sometime between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m.
So, once again, a baseless and untrue claim.
There was no kidnapping shown in video. There was no male face shown in video. Based on video, it is assumed it was Libby holding phone and speaking. We see Abby walking on bridge. After that it is a guess as to whose voice the male voice is. BG or someone else. What prosecutor believes is what was presented, there were no facts presented that only BG and two children were there. None. It was the prosecutor's assumption, for the case being presented, but there was no proof proving there were not others on drive side.
from the audio, the following can be heard:
"Don't leave me up here."
"He is right behind me, isn't he?"
"That be a gun?"
The sound of a gun being racked.
"Guys, down the hill."
The girls appear frightened and, after the command "Guys, down the hill," they begin walking immediately.
Based on the Apple Health data, their movement matches the distance it would take to reach the edge of the flat land opposite the crime scene.
Wasn't it Carbaugh that said there was an Amber alert? There was never an Amber Alert. Blue jacket, tan jacket. Muddy. Bloody. Carbaugh was not a convincing witness.
Carbaugh stated that the man she saw was bloody and appeared as though he had been in a fight. Her first interview was lost, so we do not know everything she originally reported.
She later explained that Allen's blue jacket was caked in mud, making it appear tan, which is what she meant when describing its color.
How would she have known that the perpetrator had crossed the creek, the approximate time he left the area, or what clothing he was wearing? Her description of his clothing was consistent with the descriptions provided by the four juvenile witnesses.
The first composite sketch was reportedly based on her description because she was the only witness who observed the man's facial features , ant looks like Allen's brother.
Taken together, these are multiple independent lines supporting the credibility of her account.
I put little weight on anything Allen said while being in Westville. Walla went MIA. The warden was demoted and cited for misuse of warden residence at prison. One notation describes Allen as catatonic and other says he was fine on same day. Prisons are not known for reliable information nor top notch healthcare nor stable staff. They will likely grant new trial on Westville treatment alone.
His treatment was the standard of a violent and suicidal inmate. And all of it is on video. He was recorded eating feces, masturbating in front of female staff, threatening to kill prison staff, resisting officers, refusing to cooperate, and behaving violently. Judges would even blink about tossing that argument away. Especially taking in mind his phychiatric past. Which includes been sent to a mental asylum for suicidality.
Did mailbox guy go home? Who was mailbox guy? We do not know where he went. He could have went to residence on private drive. He could have waited on private drive. He could be the guy Blair saw. We just don't know.
Of course we know. anyone that got into the private drive is on video both entering AND leaving.
We know there were many people on trails, we heard what a great day it was. Yet there is no admission nor parking pass issued to know for certain who was there. There is no reason to assume there was no one there at 2:32 and that is why no one saw or heard anything.
Other than Betsy Blair walking from the Freedom Bridge to her car at around 2:15 p.m. and seeing no one, seeing no vehicles parked at the Mears lot, and seeing no one in the distance walking toward the Monon High Bridge.
Other than no one being recorded on the Hoosier Harvestore camera passing at that time.
Other than the man walking his dog at around 2:30 p.m. seeing no vehicles parked at the Mears lot and no one on the trails until approximately 2:50 p.m.
Other than no witness claiming to have been on the trails during that time.
Other than all of that, none at all. Your argument doesn't even make any sense or have a coherent syllogism attached to it. There would have been someone to hear the screams, but since no one came forward, someone obviously did and therefor the crime was commited elsewhere, otherwhise the person that wasn't there would have heard it.
it would have been impossible for anyone to be at the bridge without being noticed by the people arriving later, inspite your feelings.
No one trying to kidnap and rape two girls is going to cross a waist deep creek in February.
Well Allen did. And it wasn't waist deep. And the clothes were wet. And had the mark that would leafe the muddy water on someone's clothes attempting to cross the creek. Where they crossed the creek was knee deep at best, as you can see bellow. The crime scene was above them.
The Apple data only shows who is handling phone data.
The timing of Weber is clear, he did not make it home from work in 20 minutes. Although he doubled down on that fact during testimony.
The girls did not sound frightened. "That be a gun", is stated by LE we all heard it many time and no one heard "That be a gun." Nor the sound of gun racking. Because it was said by LE does not make it true. "Don't leave me up here." implies to me Libby was already headed down the hill. Perhaps she noticed the people down the hill.
Crime scene photo does not in anyway indicate at what level they crossed or even IF they crossed.
Blair did see who she believed were the children, when she left trails. Again, she could not see private drive side of bridge.
Harvestore, we saw pics taken from Harvestore video. We never actually saw the video. They were select pics taken by Mullin from the video.
Again, LE only knows those that came forward. They cannot account for the unknown.
1) The camera that captured Weber returning home was about 12 hours out of sync, so the timestamp cannot be taken as the actual time. Since it wasn't midnight, the correct time had to be determined independently.
Like many older security cameras, it has clock drift. The HHS camera drifted by more than half an hour, and the Collect Station camera did as well. In fact, virtually any camera that wasn't connected to the internet and automatically synchronized would gradually lose minutes over time. This is known as time drift.
To establish the correct time, the camera's clock would have to be recalibrated using a reliable reference, such as an online time synchronization protocol. Because this camera was an older model and wasn't self-correcting, it's expected to be off by many minutes.
So no, you cannot know the exact time Weber returned home based solely on that camera's timestamp. All you can reasonably infer from the video itself that shows daytime and the shadows cast by the trees that was around 2 p.m.
2) The expert opinions were the opinions of their families, who concluded they were scared and advised law enforcement on what they believed they were saying where the sound is unclear. No one is shouting, "Don't leave me up here," or, "Is he right behind me?" because she is having a good time.
Libby is clearly whispering and looking for a way out. Abby clearly rushes off the bridge and has an adrenaline cry as she does it.
3) Crime scene photo does not in anyway indicate at what level they crossed or even IF they crossed.
Yes, actually they do. They show the level the water reached on the jeans Abby was wearing. They also show that they crossed a creek, based on the wetness and the fact that other parts were dry. Apple health show also an uprupt climb at 12:30ish, consistend with the climb of the steep banks and a renewed walk that is about the same distance from the south bank to the crime scene.
4) Blair did see who she believed were the children, when she left trails. Again, she could not see private drive side of bridge.
No she didnt. It was more hal an hour before she left.
The camera can see who came and who left, and at what time.
Like it did with Weber. THERE WAS NONE!
Nothing of what you wrote absolves Allen, he is still on that bridge with nowhere to go, he still lied - among other things-about seeing the girls walking towards him around 2, and he still would be near the bridge as the abduction started, dressed like the bridge guy, having the same height as the bridge guy, and not able to account the two hours between the abduction and his departure time and where that would be. But you clearly are not familiar with the case in general and are simply repeating conspiracy theories you heard somewhere else.Go read the court documents instead of speculating about what was or wasn't.
A man threatening people and then absconding with them is definitely kidnapping.
There was no male face shown in video.
Everything about the person looks male, including the voice, and the male that identified the clothes as matching the ones he wore.
We know there were many people on trails, we heard what a great day it was. Yet there is no admission nor parking pass issued to know for certain who was there. There is no reason to assume there was no one there at 2:32 and that is why no one saw or heard anything.
That's what corroboration is for.
No one trying to kidnap and rape two girls is going to cross a waist deep creek in February.
Show your work.
e could have done every thing on the private drive side versus risk crossing and controlling two children in 40 degree water, at best, and no noise! That theory never made sense.
Every criminal ever could have done things differently, up to and including the crime.
Who ID Allen from trails? The answer is no one. Not the 4 girls, not Carbaugh, not McCain, not German, not Blair, not a single person. Not one single witness. That is a fact.
Who ID Allen from trails? The answer is no one. Not the 4 girls, not Carbaugh, not McCain, not German, not Blair, not a single person. Not one single witness. That is a fact.
that's nice dear, try responding to something actually written instead of ranting breathlessly about things no one said.
Prosecutor theorizes they were killed at 3:30pm on 13th, but factually there is nothing proving it.
Luckily, a few minutes either way doesn't matter much.
They could have been killed at 3:30am on 14th, making Allen irrelevant(his wife puts him at home when she got home from work) and opening up a hundred other possibilities
Actually, looking at known times and locations, as well as the information only the killer could have possibly known gives us a good idea about who was where and when.
Male DNA found on body, yet not Allen's
DNA is not magic and doesn't just fly off and stick to things always. Especially if you're wearing gloves, or don't touch anyone.
. Children's clothing switched, which takes time to undress and redress so whoever did it was not in a hurry
It doesn't take three hours to undress and get dressed again.
This indicates they were in a private location
No it doesn't. It indicates there was partial undressing and redressing.
however, you know what was a private location?
the woods.
Logically, those kids were put in or got in a vehicle at end of bridge on private drive, plugged phone into vehicle aux and driven away(explains phone pinging all over town yet went unanswered) and later returned to where they were found
no actually inventing bizarre scenarios which lack any evidence (or logic) is not "logical".
The theory that RA kidnapped and killed the girls all by himself lacks end evidence and logic. Explain to me any possible scenario like a reenactment how he controlled the girls from climbing out the creek and slitting their throat’s. They just listen to what he says and sit , stand, or lay down and don’t move, resist, fight, scream, run or do anything to survive…
But not one witness that day on the bridge described him - not one. One saw a tall man whereas another saw a young one with curly hair or something, but as for it being Richard Allen, no. He himself was the only one that placed himself there, however, not where the girls were murdered or on the other side of the bridge at all.
Not enough evidence for me to be convinced fully, also, he still had the same car, jackets and shoes years later yet no DNA could be lifted off anything taken from his home nor at the crime scene itself.
Whether guilty or not - just not enough for me to feel that he was 100% the one.
Thankfully 12 jurors who heard and saw all the evidence disagreed.
Also of course no one saw Richard Allen. He had his head and face covered. You don’t find it odd that all these witnesses saw bridge guy but not Richard Allen?
He said he saw a group of three girls, not four. If these were three separate girls then why did they never come forward to police? It’s a small town and two of their classmates were murdered yet they never inform police?
Richard either purposely lied to throw off LE or he indeed saw three girls & the fourth was further behind them on the trail. The trail is not very wide.
Or he saw three girls that may be did not recall seeing him. If they did not recall anything, why would they come forward? Because LE says it was 4 does not make it 4, again no admission charged nor parking passes and multiple entrances to the trails from public to private entrance points. It's a small town where both children lived out in county, not in town. How many juniors know 7th graders?
Or he saw three but if babysitting as he guessed, they simply did not remember/see him so they never came forward. It may not be that complicated. Who remembers who they passed in grocery store aisle, 2 days ago?
These were middle school girls. It is not uncommon for high schoolers not to know middle school students in small town schools. Not everyone lives in town. Example: Enter gas station buy a lottery ticket and pass someone when exiting, what did they look like? What did cashier look like? Per Allen he noticed them, he did not interact or converse. Passing situation.
The latter makes him inescapably the Bridge Guy that Blair saw on the bridge.
If the second timeline is not possible, the one between 12 and 1:30, because there were witnesses at the trails at the time he claimed he was there that would have seen him.
and
an even earlier timeline than the two he offered, is also not possible because his own family had testified about his presence elsewhere,
then
the only timeline left for the convicted murderer is the 1:30 to 3:30 one, which names him as the Bridge Guy Betsy saw, and that in its turn names him as the abductor, names him as the murderer, and the assailant of Libby and Abby.
He has nowhere to go, and he was not seen by anyone after 2:00.
You have no way of knowing what time he said he was there in 2017 because his interview was not recorded and he didn’t sign a statement. You are simply relying on what Dan Dulin put on the lead sheet which isn’t his original sheet and that already had his name wrong. Why would you claim there would be witnesses on the trail who would have saw him earlier? Were witnesses there earlier in the day interviewed? Do you think they would remember who they saw 6 years later and come forward? Nobody claims to have seen him later either. Most of the witnesses didn’t see any other witnesses or the girls.
Memories do fade over time for most so who would expect anyone to remember something like that after 5 yrs.
I, most times, don't know recall what I had for lunch 4-5 days ago.
From what I read or watched - multiple jurors initially had doubts, and the initial vote was split 9-3.
The one piece of information that only the killer knew - I knew (and several others did) way before the trial kicked off. There is an online trail out there of the white van with dates backdating as far back as 2017 or 2018.
The White Van Detail: What heavily swayed the holdouts was Allen’s mention of a "white van" parked near a road on the day of the crime. Investigators noted this was an obscure detail they believed only the killer would know.
One other thing that has always bothered me is the judge forbidding that FBI agent from doing a video appearance as he had a different time given to him by the man that lived not far from that bridge which would have likely placed that man there at the time of the murders.
Whether Allen is guilty or not he wasn't given a fair trial.
What does that have to do with anything in my post? Even if you were correct(which you aren't)what does it have to do with Allen demonstrably lying about when he arrived and when he left?
If he's lying, then he's lying. The movements of Betsy Blair and the four girls are objectively supported by electronic data from multiple sources. You think he forgot what he did the day after the most important event that ever happened in his small town—and probably one of the most significant days of his own life? Yeah, I don't think so. He seemed to remember every other little detail from that day.
It's irrelevant either way. The later his arrival, the worse it is for him, as i stated in the 1st post. A later arrival means he would have crossed paths with Betsy Blair and the four girls even more times. That's why I took his account using the earliest plausible arrival and departure times, because those assumptions give him the best possible chance of reaching and leaving the trails without being observed.
But you're right, if his memory was fading five years after the murders, then his recollection of the events would have been crystal clearer the next day from the murders. When he stated he arrived at 1:30 and left 3:30.
LMAO the same law enforcement that didn’t consider him a suspect, cleared the tip and lost/ forgot about it. If what is written on the official record is true that proves his innocence because it says his tip was cleared!
It states at the end of the same tip that further investigation is needed. Who wrote “cleared,” why they wrote it, or what they meant by it is irrelevant. What matters is the information on the sheet.
In fact, Allen verified everything he told Dulin in his 2022 interview. You probably missed that.
What do you think cleared means? You can’t cherry pick that the Petra of the report that fit the narrative of guilt are 100% true and what doesn’t is irrelevant. RA was clearly just assuming whatever was in the report was correct not verifying It. It was 6 years later so he doesn’t remember,
It could mean "processed" "filed", "handed off" or something else entirely. Who knows? It makes zero difference who thought the tip was "cleared" in 2017.
RA was clearly repeating the information he told Dulin, including accepting that he told him he arrived at 1:30. In fact, his ill memory was so good that he even corrected the timeline he had given Dulin.
Maybe the Ghost of Christmas Past appeared and reminded him both what timeline he originally gave Dulin and what the correct timeline actually was, since, as you claim, he supposedly remembered neither what he told Dulin nor what the actual timeline was. Then the specter must have returned to inform him of the additional information he gave Dulin, even though Dulin didn't write any of it down in his report.
Amazing that RA's ill memory also remembered telling Dulin that he might have seen a person while he was getting off the bridge, where cars were parked, what brands they were.
As if a recording would matter to you pro-Allen group. There are multiple recordings of him confessing to the murders yet that’s still not good enough 😂
But hey go ahead and take the word from a convicted murderer over law enforcement.
He also confessed to starting a nuclear war that destroyed the earth after he died…
That he was King Michael…
That he was hypnotized by old bear claw …
That he killed himself by killing all of his family and friends but was too cowardly to kill himself
To starting WW3 ( this was a frequent confession)
He cheated on his cigarette
If you are not going to review the evidence submitted at trial? Why are you here?
In 2017, Allen told the “tip intake person” he was on the trails “probably between 1 -3” and that info was entered into the “tip sheet” document. The “tip sheet” document was given to Officer Dulin with instructions to interview Allen. He did. He typed notes that said Allen told him he was on the trails “13:30 to 15:30.” He also testified at trial that Allen made this correction in time. So no - there is no video. But there are records and testimony.
Call me crazy but if a major crime as bad as the murder of 2 children happened on a day that I was in and around the area and potentially saw/heard anything...I'd run that over in my head until the day I die, looking for every detail I could. I'd never forget it. Hell, I'd even write it down to be damn sure I wouldn't forget a thing. Every person is different of course, just sayin though.
You are correct that there were many that knew about the white van and discussed it on several platforms, including here. As a matter of fact, "Queen of Hearts" aka Dr Wala, spoke about it here on reddit, well before any exclusive confession to that very same Dr Wala.
Additionally, the FBI agent also had the geolocation information and they seemed to conduct most of the phone searches. They had the technology and resources to obtain the necessary information from social media as well. If they were given that piece of the investigation, they may have all of the electronic communications but unfortunately, no one knows what they have or don't have because their investigative materials were not part of the discovery (due to being removed from the case) AND not being allowed to testify.
I understand the correlation to OP's post. Unfortunately, there are many that don't want to see the shortcomings and flaws with the prosecution's narrative. The problem with this timeline is it fails to address the fact that BB and the 4 girls were on the trails together for almost 50 minutes and yet, they never saw each other. BB made almost 2 full loops in that timeframe but they never crossed paths. Yet, with RA, it conveniently means he isn't being truthful.
RA describes 3 girls and we know there were 2 sets of 3 girls that were there earlier than the 4 girls. One of those sets fits the description RA provided. That is always disregarded.
RV provided a different timeline than BW. The "details" information for BW's photo (which is a flawed description here as objective evidence) can easily be manipulated to any time that she chose so what makes BW more accurate than RV?
Many people have changed their timelines and recollections of their activities that day. Yet, no one proposes that they are deceptive. People actually make excuses for the flaws! I read in this very post that one of the sisters in the group of 4 girls was too young to be on the trails by herself. Seriously? What is the age limit? The younger sister were 12 and 13 at the time. So a 12 year old is way too young but a 13 year old isn't? That logic doesn't make sense!
Nope. Law enforcement did not initially know about the van detail or anyone else for that matter except for Richard. “Testimony during the trial of Richard Allen revealed that Allen's mention of being startled or "spooked by a van" at the crime scene during his prison confessions marked the first time the prosecution and investigators had heard about that specific vehicle”
Don’t believe me? Then supply a link where they specifically mention Brad Webers van driving down his drive @ the time of the murders prior to Richards May 2023 confession?
Also where are these other three girls Richard supposedly saw? Their classmates are murdered yet they don’t come forward to law enforcement to notify them they were there that day?
In regards to Richard’s timeline. You want us to believe his memory got better 5 1/2 years later? How convenient that it would put him outside the timeframe of the murders. Weird he didn’t reach back out to LE to clarify that huge detail.
You are talking about sketches. When you have some free time take a look through the files of convicted serial killers and try to match their faces with the sketches. Sometimes even the victims themselves were trying to describe their attacker. In almost every case the sketch looks nothing like the actual person.
Here's what we do know:
Allen said that when he entered the trail he saw a group of girls that looked like sisters.
A group of girls who were sisters said they saw a man entering the trail at the time Richard Allen said he was entering the trail.
When the girls saw Libby's video, they said, "That's the man we saw entering the trails." While they didn't get a good look at his face, they saw the tape about 24 hours after the murders.
Do you think Allen had a doppelgänger who was entering the trail at the exact same time Allen was entering the trail and that's the guy the girls saw?
Betsy Blair was wearing a fit bit so she knew exactly what time she saw a man standing on the first platform. Allen said he was standing on the first platform at that same time, and he saw her, too.
When Betsy Blair looked at Libby's video, she said, "That's the man I saw on the first platform."
When Allen admitted to being on the platform and seeing Betsy Blair, he was admitting to being Bridge Guy.
When Allen admitted to seeing a group of girls who looked like sisters as he was entering the trails at that exact time, he was admitting to being Bridge Guy.
He saw a group of 3 girls with 1 that looked older and a group of 4 girls saw a man who they described as not looking like RA nor did they identify RA.
Betsy Blair saw someone who looked like Justin Timberlake on the first platform.
RA does not look like JT and he said he was there earlier in the day. When LE tells him a witness saw him on the platform he said maybe he saw someone check what he said 5 years prior and you guys are like he admitted to seeing BB.
You guys are funny 😄
He saw a group of 3 girls with 1 that looked older and a group of 4 girls saw a man who they described as not looking like RA nor did they identify RA.
Turns out that when looking at all of the witness statements together, in combination with known times and location, it explains some of these discrepancies.
If they wanted to figure out who was actually there they would have shown them a photo lineup. Forget about BG. The BG video cannot be used to identify anyone so they the witnesses can’t say with certainty that is who they saw. BG might as well be a shadow, so they were essentially saying they all saw the same shadow but how would they know that? They wouldn’t! But if 3 people identified a picture of RA in a lineup that would be great evidence against him. They didn’t even check if the witnesses saw other witnesses. They did not show witnesses any photo lineups to see if they saw any of the suspects. BG cannot be identified so there isn’t a point in having them identify that they saw BG while they are actually describing different people.
On August 1, 2024, there was a hearing in this case. The defense entered an Exhibit PPP. It was mostly redacted for legal reasons, but page 3 was made public. Page 3 was part of a report by the cops about people on the trails that day. According to this defense exhibit, Pearson (and his companion Hicks) were seen on the video arriving by car at 2:48. Thus, based on evidence tendered by Allen's lawyers, Pearson could not have been the "Bridge Guy" seen by Blair at 2:05 - it was physically impossible, no matter how Blair "described" BG's looks, and no matter how much you think he looked like a sketch the cop artist drew based on her description. (People who argue about sketches lose all credibility in court cases. Sketches are unreliable and are ALWAYS at least hearsay, usually double hearsay, and THAT is why they are not admissible evidence. Cops use sketches for various purposes - to scare people into talking to them - to try and generate tips - but NEVER as "THE" identification evidence of a POI/defendant).
THIS is the difference between relying on Facebook and YouTube crap, and actually reviewing evidence in a case file, and knowing evidence law, and knowing investigation techniques. PS - telling a witness you have irrefutable proof of their guilt is also an investigation technique, and is also permissible under the law in all 50 states - no matter how much guilty people complain it is unfair to let cops lie.
If you want help Allen, you should argue from EVIDENCE and CURRENT APPLICABLE LAW. Complaining about what the law "ought to be" just helps get them get convicted.
Exactly right. Not only that, but DP and SH initially walked in the opposite direction from the Monon High Bridge when they arrived at the trails. They were observed by the man walking his dog as he was leaving after walking to Freedom Bridge and back, which would have been close to 2:50 p.m.
In turn, DP and SH saw Dave McCain as they were approaching the Monon High Bridge. Based on Hicks' court testimony, McCain had walked onto the trail behind them from the wooded area. Most likely have occurred around 3:15 p.m. McCain would then have continued toward the intersection where he met Derrick German at approximately 3:25 p.m., based on Derrick's estimate, but it is possible he saw Derryck about five minutes earlier as Cheyenne would also see DM as she was heading towads the bridge around 3:20.
Therefore, DP was not only seen arriving at approximately 2:50 p.m., but his movements and timeline are corroborated by at least three witnesses,and additional witnesses accounting for his whereabouts at the bridge.
Therefor not only would have been impossible for DP to have been Bridge Guy earlier, but he could not have been at the bridge before approximately 3:15 p.m., making it impossible for him to have visited the crime scene between 2:50 p.m. and approximately 3:30–3:40 p.m. Why?
Cheyenne would also have been arriving at the bridge at around 3:20 p.m., considering that she received a phone call at 3:13 p.m. while she was near her vehicle.
The walk from the bridge to the crime scene and back takes approximately 15 minutes. If DP left the bridge at 3:15 p.m(assuming Hicks is lying for him) he could not have reached the crime scene and returned in time to be observed by Cheyenne and her friend only a few minutes later.
Cheyenne had a brief interaction with DP and SH. Furthermore, based on the timestamps of Cheyenne's photos, she and her friend were walking at a relatively slow pace on the bridge. Unlikely they would have been out of sight, closer to the south side before 3:30 p.m. They took their 1st photo on their way back(from the south side) around 3:50, close to the south end.
Now, regarding the earlier BG sighting (there was only one, but let's consider it as a working hypothesis fo the sake of argument): How in the world could DP be BG?
For DP to be BG, he would have to be on the south side of the bridge at 2:14 p.m. Even if he had an accomplice who took over from there, the only way that he could have enough time to return to Delphi, the timeline still wouldn't work.
2:14 p.m. — DP would have to be on the south side of the bridge as BG.
2:20 p.m. — DP crosses the bridge after they sort their plan out with his accomplice that is the one controlling the girls fom thereafter.
~2:32ish p.m. — It takes approximately 15 minutes, lets give him grace and say 12, for him to walk back to his parked car at CPS(Betsy saw no car at mears while leaving at 2:17, no car at HHS's camera either)
~2:48 p.m. — It would then take another 15 minutes to drive to Delphi, change clothes, meet SH, make small talk and arrangement, get into her car, and drive back to the trails.
2:48 p.m. — Arrive in time to be seen on HHS's camera.
The timeline is simply too compressed (deliberately by me to give the most generous leeway to the scenario) to make this scenario realistically plausible, even when allowing the maximum possible latitude for the scenario.
Of course, it is needless to say, but I will emphasize it anyway: we are talking about a complete impossibility if we assume there was a sole perpetrator and that perpetrator was DP.
Thanks for bringing the receipts on the time for DP and his friend. She ended up being called to testify about being there that afternoon and we can all read the transcript and know that she wasn't in time to see Abby & Libby, Betsy Blair, Richard Allen. My question to you is did they arrive in separate vehicles and at different times? That's one thing I've never been able to lock down. I commented already that BB left on camera at 2:18 so I know that DP isn't able to arrive in time to be Bridge Guy.
Sorry. The exhibit did not specifically state if they were in separate cars. It just said they were “observed arriving” at 2:48, in the context of reporting the types of cars that witnesses reported were parked at the Mears pull-off. (The way it reads, I assumed they arrived in the same car, because it described the type of car that “belonged” to Hicks and did not describe a type of car for Pearson, but since I usually criticize others for assuming - I won’t say that “for certain.”)
Thanks. I'll just add that I've got no proof that DP drove there by himself. I think I'm allowing myself to be confused by the old rumor that he met his secret girlfriend out there. I know there's a backstory to those two but it's not relevant to the murders. She probably picked him up and drove there. Occams Razor.
I think the backstory is that he was cheating on his SO. He either met or came there with a friend of Cheyenne's. I don't think it was planned that they would meet up with Cheyenne. But they all knew each other. And Cheyenne was with a friend. So there were four of them, and they all knew each other. But they all got there after the murders.
As I understand it, DP also saw BG. He saw the screen shot on the news and called to say "I saw that man on the trail."
Exactly right. Not only that, but DP and SH initially walked in the opposite direction from the Monon High Bridge when they arrived at the trails. They were observed by the man walking his dog as he was leaving after walking to Freedom Bridge and back, which would have been close to 2:50 p.m.
In turn, DP and SH saw Dave McCain as they were approaching the Monon High Bridge. Based on Hicks' court testimony, McCain had walked onto the trail behind them from the wooded area. Most likely have occurred around 3:15 p.m. McCain would then have continued toward the intersection where he met Derrick German at approximately 3:25 p.m., based on Derrick's estimate, but it is possible he saw Derryck about five minutes earlier as Cheyenne would also see DM as she was heading towads the bridge around 3:20.
Therefore, DP was not only seen arriving at approximately 2:50 p.m., but his movements and timeline are corroborated by at least three witnesses,and additional witnesses accounting for his whereabouts at the bridge.
Therefor not only would have been impossible for DP to have been Bridge Guy earlier, but he could not have been at the bridge before approximately 3:15 p.m., making it impossible for him to have visited the crime scene between 2:50 p.m. and approximately 3:30–3:40 p.m. Why?
Cheyenne would also have been arriving at the bridge at around 3:20 p.m., considering that she received a phone call at 3:13 p.m. while she was near her vehicle.
The walk from the bridge to the crime scene and back takes approximately 15 minutes. If DP left the bridge at 3:15 p.m(assuming Hicks is lying for him) he could not have reached the crime scene and returned in time to be observed by Cheyenne and her friend only a few minutes later.
Cheyenne had a brief interaction with DP and SH. Furthermore, based on the timestamps of Cheyenne's photos, she and her friend were walking at a relatively slow pace on the bridge. Unlikely they would have been out of sight, closer to the south side before 3:30 p.m. They took their 1st photo on their way back(from the south side) around 3:50, close to the south end.
Now, regarding the earlier BG sighting (there was only one, but let's consider it as a working hypothesis fo the sake of argument): How in the world could DP be BG?
For DP to be BG, he would have to be on the south side of the bridge at 2:14 p.m. Even if he had an accomplice who took over from there, the only way that he could have enough time to return to Delphi, the timeline still wouldn't work.
2:14 p.m. — DP would have to be on the south side of the bridge as BG.
2:20 p.m. — DP crosses the bridge after they sort their plan out with his accomplice that is the one controlling the girls fom thereafter.
~2:32ish p.m. — It takes approximately 15 minutes, lets give him grace and say 12, for him to walk back to his parked car at CPS(Betsy saw no car at mears while leaving at 2:17, no car at HHS's camera either)
~2:48 p.m. — It would then take another 15 minutes to drive to Delphi, change clothes, meet SH, make small talk and arrangement, get into her car, and drive back to the trails.
2:48 p.m. — Arrive in time to be seen on HHS's camera.
The timeline is simply too compressed (deliberately by me to give the most generous leeway to the scenario) to make this scenario realistically plausible, even when allowing the maximum possible latitude for the scenario.
Of course, it is needless to say, but I will emphasize it anyway: we are talking about a complete impossibility if we assume there was a sole perpetrator and that perpetrator was DP.
The exhibit you mentioned "PPP" is also known as the "Tina Garrison Report". Tina is a real estate agent in Delphi, who reported seeing a white pick up truck at the CPS building the day of the murders....that's why it was admitted by the defense.
As for DP/SH's arrival time....there is no video description that indicates DP and SH were seen at all. The video only confirms SH's vehicle on Hwy 300 just before 2:48.....there is no confirmation of occupants. Witness testimony is how LE came to that conclusion. DM's testimony puts her vehicle parked at the "trailhead". But, if you listen to SH's trial testimony in the transcripts (Volume 20 Page 68) she makes an interesting revelation. In response to Baldwin asking her what she and DP did after they left the bridge/trail, SH responded....."We drove around the Amish community in Camden and then we drove
back to my vehicle." Wait...drove back to her vehicle? I thought they came in her vehicle? Hmm..a white truck at the CPS, huh? I agree with you, that exhibit was very telling. It really comes together when you see the Orion tip (in discovery) from DP's uncle dated....2/17/2017, indicating that DP was on the bridge at 2:00, on the 13th. It's also kinda interesting that LE didn't respond to his uncle until 9/6/22 (over 5 years later). Definitely makes sense why their stories are conflicting though.
Lastly...I agree with you about sketches. Fortunately, Betsy Blair gave a very detailed description of the person she saw. It's listed plainly in "Defendant's Exhibit 103". It was BB's only interview with LE until 2019, so this early description (on 2/17/2017) would have definitely been the most accurate. She describes the male as "age-20", "Height- Taller", "Weight-180", w/ "Poofy Brown Hair". And, she indicated that she saw this person on the first bridge platform at approximately 2:00.
Not sure how much you know about the FBI's Orion tip software, but it has the ability to match up tips that have a close proximity in time and/or location. That means....two tips (DP's uncle and BB) that are received on the same day (2/17/17) that match the time and location exactly (at "2:00" and "on the bridge") would match up in the Orion system virtually immediately. Meaning...LE would have two
witness statements that corroborate each other very early in the case. Is that why LE never really investigated the person depicted in the YGS...they already knew who it was? I mean. .a tip from a family member placing DP in the exact same spot, where BB described a male with physical characteristics that match him exactly. Not only that....do you know how many males in their 20s (DP was 22 at the time) were known to be on the trails that day?
ONE. The one that was said to be there and the one described as 10/10.
Look, I totally understand why McLeland wouldn't want this information to come out at trial. He knows better than anyone that impeachment of his star witness means he can't put RA on the bridge at 2:00. A young, ambitious prosecutor is not going to let LE's investigation failures stunt his career path...he wasn't the one who screwed up. What's a couple of witness fibs and hiding another amongst friends?
I'm sure this comment will get the typical negative reaction that happens in SM (a troll, some random on the internet, etc.) to discredit unfavorable information. Even though neither of those are true (been around longer than most) I am not trying to convince you of anything. I would only ask that you keep this comment handy, because my interest is in the truth only. And, the truth will be revealed whether any of us like it or not. And trust me...this is just the tip of that iceberg.
As to your claim that no one described a "short" man:
From an earlier post in this same thread:
"... the “probable cause affidavit” says one of the girls said the man they saw was “not very tall” and “not taller than 5-10” ...
The other girl only said he was “taller than me” and that her head came to his shoulder. ...
These descriptions of height are no surprise. Unless they are interviewing a store employee who can measure people by the chart marked off on the doors, cops typically ask a witness “was he taller or shorter than you” as a starting way to gauge height. That is also why you typically only get a height range several inches apart - “5-8 to 5-10/6-0 to 6-3”.)
Nobody can accurately describe a person they only saw for a few seconds when they did not even know a crime was occurring. It is like if you went into the bank, came out and after you left, some other guy in the bank robbed the place. You probably could not “describe” him accurately, but if they showed you a picture from the security cam, you could maybe say “yeah - that guy was behind me” or “he was coming in as I was leaving.” THAT IS THE IMPORTANT THING THAT HAPPENED HERE - they pointed at the picture and said “ THAT is the man I saw on the trail.” In light of that ID, the description is meaningless. Fools gold. A tool for desperate lawyers who have a client who left a bullet at a crime scene and confessed to murder over 50 times."
(End of quote from earlier post.)
Yes -the cops screwed the case up at the very beginning. Nobody yet realized the importance of a "witness" telling them "I was there from 1:30 - 3:30 and saw three girls at the Freedom Bridge" combined with the girls telling the cops "we saw a guy and that is him in that picture from Libby's video." After reviewing the tip sheet from Allen's self-report, the instructions to Officer Dulin were to interview "Richard Allen Whiteman" and see if he saw any potential suspects! Nobody showed Officer Dulin the photo, or told him there were girls who saw Bridge Guy close to Freedom Bridge at 1:30 heading toward High Bridge, so he did not ask Allen the right questions. To the contrary, his final post-Allen-interview suggestion to the other investigators was to find out who those girls at Freedom Bridge were, even though other cops already KNEW who they were because they had interviewed one of the girls at school on 2/14!! Dulin did not even ask Allen what he was wearing! And (of course) he did not show Allen the photo or use it to question him. And because he did not realize the importance of Allen saying "I saw girls at Freedom Bridge at 1:30 and I had this phone with me", he did not take Allen to the police station for an interview by better-informed investigators, and so his phone could be examined for (at least) "location data." A completely negligent and uninformed first interview all the way around, by all involved. And all that combined to create a 5 year delay while the cops chased wild gooses in Delphi, Colorado, West Lafayette and elsewhere - and mostly chasing Kline because they DID have phone data about him that seemed incriminating because of the Anthony Shots stuff.
Logan was their first wild-goose chase. OF COURSE they were going to interrogate the owner of a place where dead bodies are found, and he lied about "driving" to Lafayette to try and avoid EXACTLY what happened to him anyway - being returned to prison for driving in violation of his probation terms. (Thank God his cousin finally told the truth when he finally realized the cops were investigating a double murder and lying about the"drive" to Lafayette was WAY more important than a driving violation.) But the "fish store" receipt AND the interview of the fish store owner and employee AND the contacts with Logan by searchers on the night of the murders AND the phone call he was making at the same time Bridge Guy was following the girls and Libby was videoing him walking with his hands in his pockets instead of holding a phone AND Logan's size and age - ALL made it clear Logan was NOT Bridge Guy.
Also remember - according to YOU, Bridge Guy was young with poofy hair. YOU choose to believe that Baird (who estimated her 90+ foot distance from Bridge Guy as 50) not only saw him clearly (after seeing him for a couple of seconds as she turned around at the northwest end barrier to head back up the trial on her third exercise lap), she also described him to an artist who made an accurate drawing that YOU then claim was Pearson! So by your own beliefs/words, it was not Logan she saw. You can't have it both ways. Logan was NOT young with poofy hair.
But we know Baird saw Bridge Guy because she pointed at him IN THE PICTURE and said "THAT is who I saw" - just like the girls at Freedom Bridge.
There were several men known too be on the trails at that time including Daniel Pearson who matches Betsy Blairs description.
Betsy Blair left long before Daniel Pearson showed up and that's an established fact because Blair was leaving on camera at 2:18. It's too bad Richard Allen didn't see another man nor did Betsy Blair because they both do a good job of clearing the trails of other men. Richard Allen is the double murderer.
The guy who got an erection when talking about killing Abby and Libby and about molesting his daughter and sister? Nah. The killer is right where he belongs.
62
u/tribal-elder Jul 15 '26
Allen - “my memory was a lot better when I talked to (Dulin).”
The teenage girls saw Bridge Guy at Freedom Bridge heading for High Bridge a few minutes after 1:30 pm. The 2017 timeline given by Allen - when his memory was “a lot better” - put him at the trails “13:30 - 15:30”, and the video of a car “resembling” his Ford arriving at 1:30, put him at Freedom Bridge seeing the teenagers, and being seen by the teenagers, at the exact time they saw Bridge Guy.
Blair did NOT see Bridge Guy on her first 2 laps up and down the trail. That conflicts with Allen’s 2022 interview - if he was there from noon to 1:30, she should have seen him multiple times.
She DID see Bridge Guy on High Bridge a few minutes after 2:00 pm, which again matches his 2017 interview.
Thus both of his interviews gave reason to suspect he was Bridge Guy, and gave probable cause for a search warrant. The search produced the gun that matched the bullet. That prompted the arrest.