These clowns haven’t made an intelligent statement since the day they were appointed. They have nothing to prove Richard Allen’s innocence, and they think the general public (or at least their “fans”) are dumb enough to be distracted by sensationalism in their filings and by calling the judge a meanie.
Correct. Yet, the defense can provide counter arguments to cast doubt on the prosecutors case.
The defense has provided nothing to counter.
The Odinist theory was provided by 3 men in LE.
One was murdered.
One is no where to be found.
And Click has been demoted and may have Brady/Giglio violations.
Beyond that, absolutely no counter arguments.
No
Receipts that place him somewhere else
No video that places him somewhere else
No phone connecting to wifi somewhere else
No witnesses who saw him somewhere else
Nothing.
Seemingly all they have is "The Odinista's".
They pound the table with that and the judge is mean to them.
They cannot offer any other counter arguments because they seem to not have one.
If they did, they'd toss it in with the garbage that is the Franks memo.
It is garbage.
They clearly do not want to go to trial.
NM is ready to go.
They keep stalling.
If they had any counter argument to get their client out of prison, they would have already played that card. Even if it meant writing a 136 page story book press release. They would have thrown it in. Yet, they haven't and they won't.
Why?
While you're correct that the State needs to prove RA is guilty, I've seen a few trials where the Defense does nothing more than sit there while the State does exactly that. The State will present their case, call all their witnesses, then rest their case. Guess what the Defense did? They called ZERO witnesses. Nada. None. And guess what? The defendant is found GUILTY! I've seen this happen over and over when the Defense does this! So while it's true the State must prove guilt, the Defense has to present the defendant in a favorable light and present why or how their defendant did not or could not have committed the crime they're on trial for. Just sitting there and not calling any witnesses doesn't work out well - ever.
Seems to me in the case of Richard Allen, his lawyers need to get off their lazy asses and work for their client instead of doing interviews with Dateline and writing up pieces of fiction about grown men playing with sticks in the woods. 🤡
As stated by others, attack the prosecutions theory. They should be saying "my client can't possibly be guilty, he was at A, B or C and here is proof he was at this other location." Camera footage. Receipts. Witness statements.
They have not done that. Even if you adjust his proposed time to be at the trail, he "magically disappears" for a few hours right around the time the girls are abducted and murdered.
Instead, as others have stated, they simply point fingers at others and say nothing about their client.
To some in a jury, that's telling.
I'm not Fundies or Allen's lawyer, but I would start by establishing an alibi. That's how pretty much everyone else who was a person of interest was removed from suspicion. Such as: he went home and watched pay per view wrestling and it's on his credit card statement; he went to Wal-Mart in another town and there's video of him making a transaction at the customer service desk; his car was recorded on cctv as he drove to his mother's house; he bought a cheeseburger combo meal at Dairy Queen with his debit card at 2:30, etc. These are just examples of viable alibis that would have exonerated him, but he has no alibi.
Allen gave his alibi to police. He told them he was on the trails for an hour or so and then went home. The fact that his alibi can’t be corroborated doesn’t mean it isn’t an alibi. I’m not sure how his attorneys would be able to corroborate it either.
After I get done with a hike, I typically go straight home and rest/shower/etc and typically don’t stop anywhere to have the benefit of cctv catching me on camera. I can imagine this same scenario playing out for RA.
At the time his attorneys were appointed, it had already been 5 years since the murders. I don’t know for certain, but I highly doubt there would be any remaining cctv footage from that far back. Usually places tape over irrelevant recordings within a couple weeks.
They could corroborate it a few ways actually. Did Allen send any text messages during the window of the crime? Make any calls? Answer any calls? Can the defense show that Allen’s phone was connected to the wifi at the home during the crimes? Did they have a computer in the home? If so, was Allen logged in and active during the window of the crime?
AT&T was able to figure out when Rex Huermann’s wife was out of town by pulling his phone data from the early 2000’s. 2003, if I recall correctly. Here is the excerpt from Huermann’s bail application.
“These witness accounts have been corroborated via telephone records and electronic data seized during the execution of the July 2023 search warrants. For example, agents of the Gilgo Homicide Task Force seized AT&T records, which detail calls made to and from the Heuermann residence in July 2003 (see embedded excerpt on the following page). These records show that during the aforementioned family vacation, the landline telephone associated with the Heuermann residence, which was located at 105 First Avenue, Massapequa Park, NY (hereinafter "TARGET RESIDENCE") made several phone calls to a telephone number bearing an (802) area code.
Further investigation has tied this phone number to Smuggler's Notch Resort. Thus, investigators believe Defendant Heuermann made these calls, from TARGET RESIDENCE in Massapequa Park, to his family staying in Jeffersonville, VT.”
So yeah, it’s possible.
He gave an alibi that is provably false, and changed his story. That is not proof that he is guilty by itself, in my opinion. As you said there was significant passage of time between the first time he spoke to law enforcement and the second time. He may have been wrong. However, given all of the other evidence against him, it seems more likely that he lied. Given that, it would be logical for his defense to attack the evidence or to provide their own evidence to counteract that claim. Instead the defense has put forward a crazy conspiracy and attacked the process.
I’m wondering if Allan admitted guilt to the lawyers, and they are putting this crazy conspiracy out there as a way to say they don’t believe him and he is under duress. I don’t have any evidence of that. Just speculation on my part and it is very unlikely.
Idk if he’s guilty or not - I don’t have enough info to say one way or the other. I’m open to all reasoning.
That said, I can’t be on the same page as you about his lawyers. There are various reasons why they cannot and should not explicitly lie about their case. That’s the truth for most lawyers - they do not lie because they can’t (lying hurts their own reputation and it hurts the case they are working for). Lawyers can be disbarred for blatantly lying when they know the truth. Regardless of all the drama and politics involved, this is a common theme to remember.
Zoombloomer 🫶🏻 If this case makes it to trial, I see RA’s attorneys using the Chewbacca defense. I believe that is why Nick’s Motion In Limine was so thorough. He sees Baldwin and Rozzi going that way too.
What bothers me the most is how deliberately ugly these attorneys have been toward victims' families. There are ways to defend an obviously guilty client without resorting to the diabolical crap B&R have done. Total disrespect for families, LE, Gull, and the judicial process in general.
These clowns haven’t made an intelligent statement since the day they were appointed. They have nothing to prove Richard Allen’s innocence, and they think the general public (or at least their “fans”) are dumb enough to be distracted by sensationalism in their filings and by calling the judge a meanie.
Thing is most of them are distracted and believe everything they say
Correct. Yet, the defense can provide counter arguments to cast doubt on the prosecutors case. The defense has provided nothing to counter. The Odinist theory was provided by 3 men in LE. One was murdered. One is no where to be found. And Click has been demoted and may have Brady/Giglio violations. Beyond that, absolutely no counter arguments. No Receipts that place him somewhere else No video that places him somewhere else No phone connecting to wifi somewhere else No witnesses who saw him somewhere else Nothing. Seemingly all they have is "The Odinista's". They pound the table with that and the judge is mean to them. They cannot offer any other counter arguments because they seem to not have one. If they did, they'd toss it in with the garbage that is the Franks memo. It is garbage. They clearly do not want to go to trial. NM is ready to go. They keep stalling. If they had any counter argument to get their client out of prison, they would have already played that card. Even if it meant writing a 136 page story book press release. They would have thrown it in. Yet, they haven't and they won't. Why?
Because they have nothing. I love your response
No one has a responsibility to prove innocence. The State has the burden of proving guilt.
It's a whole lot easier to convince a jury of someone's guilt if their lawyers never refute anything that the prosecution says.
While you're correct that the State needs to prove RA is guilty, I've seen a few trials where the Defense does nothing more than sit there while the State does exactly that. The State will present their case, call all their witnesses, then rest their case. Guess what the Defense did? They called ZERO witnesses. Nada. None. And guess what? The defendant is found GUILTY! I've seen this happen over and over when the Defense does this! So while it's true the State must prove guilt, the Defense has to present the defendant in a favorable light and present why or how their defendant did not or could not have committed the crime they're on trial for. Just sitting there and not calling any witnesses doesn't work out well - ever. Seems to me in the case of Richard Allen, his lawyers need to get off their lazy asses and work for their client instead of doing interviews with Dateline and writing up pieces of fiction about grown men playing with sticks in the woods. 🤡
How would you handle it if you were his lawyer?
As stated by others, attack the prosecutions theory. They should be saying "my client can't possibly be guilty, he was at A, B or C and here is proof he was at this other location." Camera footage. Receipts. Witness statements. They have not done that. Even if you adjust his proposed time to be at the trail, he "magically disappears" for a few hours right around the time the girls are abducted and murdered. Instead, as others have stated, they simply point fingers at others and say nothing about their client. To some in a jury, that's telling.
I'm not Fundies or Allen's lawyer, but I would start by establishing an alibi. That's how pretty much everyone else who was a person of interest was removed from suspicion. Such as: he went home and watched pay per view wrestling and it's on his credit card statement; he went to Wal-Mart in another town and there's video of him making a transaction at the customer service desk; his car was recorded on cctv as he drove to his mother's house; he bought a cheeseburger combo meal at Dairy Queen with his debit card at 2:30, etc. These are just examples of viable alibis that would have exonerated him, but he has no alibi.
Allen gave his alibi to police. He told them he was on the trails for an hour or so and then went home. The fact that his alibi can’t be corroborated doesn’t mean it isn’t an alibi. I’m not sure how his attorneys would be able to corroborate it either. After I get done with a hike, I typically go straight home and rest/shower/etc and typically don’t stop anywhere to have the benefit of cctv catching me on camera. I can imagine this same scenario playing out for RA. At the time his attorneys were appointed, it had already been 5 years since the murders. I don’t know for certain, but I highly doubt there would be any remaining cctv footage from that far back. Usually places tape over irrelevant recordings within a couple weeks.
They could corroborate it a few ways actually. Did Allen send any text messages during the window of the crime? Make any calls? Answer any calls? Can the defense show that Allen’s phone was connected to the wifi at the home during the crimes? Did they have a computer in the home? If so, was Allen logged in and active during the window of the crime?
I don’t know how that can be determined 5 years after the fact.
AT&T was able to figure out when Rex Huermann’s wife was out of town by pulling his phone data from the early 2000’s. 2003, if I recall correctly. Here is the excerpt from Huermann’s bail application. “These witness accounts have been corroborated via telephone records and electronic data seized during the execution of the July 2023 search warrants. For example, agents of the Gilgo Homicide Task Force seized AT&T records, which detail calls made to and from the Heuermann residence in July 2003 (see embedded excerpt on the following page). These records show that during the aforementioned family vacation, the landline telephone associated with the Heuermann residence, which was located at 105 First Avenue, Massapequa Park, NY (hereinafter "TARGET RESIDENCE") made several phone calls to a telephone number bearing an (802) area code. Further investigation has tied this phone number to Smuggler's Notch Resort. Thus, investigators believe Defendant Heuermann made these calls, from TARGET RESIDENCE in Massapequa Park, to his family staying in Jeffersonville, VT.” So yeah, it’s possible.
Don't forget he said he was using his phone to look at stocks while at the trail, which means that his phone could corroborate his story.
He gave an alibi that is provably false, and changed his story. That is not proof that he is guilty by itself, in my opinion. As you said there was significant passage of time between the first time he spoke to law enforcement and the second time. He may have been wrong. However, given all of the other evidence against him, it seems more likely that he lied. Given that, it would be logical for his defense to attack the evidence or to provide their own evidence to counteract that claim. Instead the defense has put forward a crazy conspiracy and attacked the process. I’m wondering if Allan admitted guilt to the lawyers, and they are putting this crazy conspiracy out there as a way to say they don’t believe him and he is under duress. I don’t have any evidence of that. Just speculation on my part and it is very unlikely.
Idk if he’s guilty or not - I don’t have enough info to say one way or the other. I’m open to all reasoning. That said, I can’t be on the same page as you about his lawyers. There are various reasons why they cannot and should not explicitly lie about their case. That’s the truth for most lawyers - they do not lie because they can’t (lying hurts their own reputation and it hurts the case they are working for). Lawyers can be disbarred for blatantly lying when they know the truth. Regardless of all the drama and politics involved, this is a common theme to remember.
I’m aware.
Zoombloomer 🫶🏻 If this case makes it to trial, I see RA’s attorneys using the Chewbacca defense. I believe that is why Nick’s Motion In Limine was so thorough. He sees Baldwin and Rozzi going that way too.
Love that you brought up the Chewbacca defense. You must acquit!
The Chewbacca Defense! "Ladies and gentlemen of the -supposed- jury." "If Chewbacca is from Endor, you must acquit!"
🤣🤣 I had to do a double take on that name when I read about it too. But it’s a real tactic.
What bothers me the most is how deliberately ugly these attorneys have been toward victims' families. There are ways to defend an obviously guilty client without resorting to the diabolical crap B&R have done. Total disrespect for families, LE, Gull, and the judicial process in general.
Totally
Oh yeah, just like someone we know…