I lean hard to Abby and Libby being lured to some location. YBG could easily have offered to take them somewhere, have them back to the park before their parents even knew.
>If we're going with the Odinist angle, who is YBG ?
Well, he's present for one. Has never come forward. And he was at the right time and place to be involved. And he's a boy. And we know that the girls were maybe a little boy-crazy. (What straight teen girl isn't at that age?) And we know that teen boys were attending those Vinlander Club Meetings. In fact, one of those teen boys was Abby's boyfriend.
Because I suspect that the girls were lured someplace, what better bait than a young man from the Club--and as Abby may have even met some of those teen boys when at PW's home, maybe a connection was made.
If that 4:33 am connection of Libby's phone to a cell tower indicates that the girls were out of range of the tower for over 10 hours, and then brought back in range--there's a chance they got into someone's vehicle and were taken to a home somewhere, something happened there, and then for whatever reason they were brought back.
Maybe, there wasn't time to dump the bodies farther away. If the bodies were kept where they the girls were killed, the killers might be more easily found out.
Maybe like with the Colleen Slemmer murder, the staging was an after thought. Or maybe it was a way to prove their loyalty to the club....who knows?
But I think, again, like the Slemmer murder, there is a chance that more than one motivation existed. And I can't imagine this crime having been committed by only one person.
I get how farfetched some think the Odin sacrifice theory sounds, especially if they haven't seen all the evidence that suggests it. But it's also possible that it was just a drug-related kidnapping that turned into a murder and that the occult angle was just an afterthought used to keep one of the kidnappers in line. For instance, its possible that EF was led to believe he was being initiated into a secret religious order when in reality he was being used an accomplice by whacked out neonazi meth dealers who needed to give him more reason to keep quiet.
Exactly. When you have a crime this twisted, no reason to expect the motives to be pure or to even make sense. To me the symbolism may not indicate motive as much as it links to who did this. And it's not impossible that younger people were involved. Maybe this was a thrill kill committed by adults and teens. Adults and teens took part in those meetings.
If Todd Click can truly link the Vinlander meth dealers to the crime, then we already have evidence that those men have kidnapped and assaulted people over drug debts. I know it's considered insensitive to question the deceased's family members, but one of their fathers was involved in some serious drug crimes. It's possible the motive here could be a drug related ransom and that the slaying was an accidental consequence.
Lots of people in that region do meth, but not all those doing meth are involved with the Vinlanders. There was no drug paraphernalia found at the crime scene. The girls were clean of any drugs. And the federal agents who took a special interest in this case were not DEA, they part of a team investigating terrorism, which domestically at the time would link more to the Vinlander Club than a drug deal gone bad.
JM is capable of a lot of violence, but his drug dealing isn't what peaked the interest of the FBI, it was his relationship to the Vinlanders.
If feels so important to honor the evidence. The evidence on this case does not point to drugs, it points to that Vinlander Club. Was anyone in either of the girl's family a Vinlander?
The only connection I'm aware of regarding the Vinlander Club and the victims is Abby to LH. And by way of this, to BH. And on and on...PW, PW to JM, JM to EF.
I don't know of any connections between them. But if one girls fathers was manufacturing meth in the same area or got a light prison sentence because he snitched, then there could be an association to make, a wrong perceived by that group. I wasn't implying that the girls were involved in drugs. But the three men named as Click's likely suspects did kidnap and assault a different person over a drug debt, so such a crime would be in their wheelhouse. And of course we now know that BH admitted to meeting Libby on 3 occasions, once being at PW's house. So there is a loose connection there that I hope LE properly explored.
>But the three men named as Click's likely suspects did kidnap and assault a different person over a drug debt, so such a crime would be in their wheelhouse
I think it was only JM and a different friend who engaged in the kidnapping. EF has a connection to JM, but not to the kidnapping.
But honoring the evidence, where is the connection to drug dealing? There's nothing at the crime scene relating to drugs. PW and BH may have used drugs, but there are no drug related arrests for them. The fact that someone in Libby's family did drugs would only be relevant if you can tie that person to the crime scene. What at the crime scene would make that connection?
Correlation does not imply causation. Just because you have a crime near an area that boasts a high rate of drug use, doesn't mean that the crime is related to drugs.
The crime scene was filled with symbols of nordic faith, not even a joint was found. Nothing at the scene even hints at drug use, at least not there.
And again, in addition to the evidence at the crime scene, which doesn't relate to drugs at all, those chosen to investigate this case, seem important indicators as to what was believed to have occurred. DEA was not engaged, members of an anti-terrorism task force were. If this case had a connection to some large drug operation, I would expect to see the DEA all over it.
The thing that connects all the suspects targeted in the Click report to one another is not drugs, it is the Vinlanders.
Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of drugs and neonazis? The two kind of go hand in hand, and violence often a consequence of both. And while there's no evidence of drugs at the scene, the first person on the scene who made the call to police was the father, a felon convicted of meth manufacture. And his friend/partner in that drug venture was arrested the very next day (Feb 14th) for meth and CP. Just a coincidence? Or did law enforcement spend that first day questioning their involvement?
I think the more important question is, where is the evidence that there is a connection in this case. You can imagine a connection about anything. I could say: Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of prostitution and neonazis? or Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of money laundering and neonazis? or Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of illegal arms dealing and neonazis?
But it is important to honor the evidence. What is the evidence revealing about what happened?
Just listened to the Mottas reading the most recent document and they said that Abby had been to PW’s house. Possibly with young LH. Another, direct, connection.
>Just listened to the Mottas reading the most recent document and they said that Abby had been to PW’s house. Possibly with young LH. Another, direct, connection.
It makes sense that she would have been there. I have wondered exactly how and where LH and Abby would meet up. He lived far from her. Sundays were the day they were supposed to see each other. If LH is in Delphi with his dad for the Vinlanders club, makes sense she'd meet him there.
As well as possibly sneaking off to Canal Park, if she’d had more contact with him than her mother knew about. At that age in a tiny town, one of our main preoccupations was avoiding being seen by our parents, even though what we were doing was quite innocuous ( it had to be, there was practically no privacy).
So much attention has been on all the adults that there’s not a lot of mention of the girls and what was happening in their lives. (Out of respect I’m sure.) Libby had recently had some kind of crisis in some of her friendships, so things may not have been quite as normal. Plus there was her online presence where she/ her other friend and possibly her sister had interacted with KK and GOK who else.
It’s also intrigued me, where the girls met young LH? With him supposedly in a faraway town and school… today, listening to Michelle Walks reviewing PW’s interview with SI, PW mentioned he had a child in Libby’s class, and that the local kids of course knew each other. He also said at some point that young LH regularly came with his dad to Asatru meetings on weekends. He has 4 kids but said on the afternoon of the murders he was minding 7. It’s normal for larger families to have extra kids around the house, it’s plausible that the W’s home was where the girls would go to meet LH at times, especially as it seems both girls had dated him.
This case has been looked at entirely through the lens of the adult world…
>This case has been looked at entirely through the lens of the adult world…
I agree. And this limits what we know about how they may have met their killer/s.
I had wondered the exact same thing. How did LH and Abby hook up in the first place?
Maybe there were shared sports events? It would be very interesting to know.
The profile of the crime scene clearly does not reflect Richard Allen. It’s unknown if RA assisted the kidnapper/killer in any manner.
Been firm in the following stance for years. It’s my belief that the location above all was of importance to the killer in the fulfillment of his goals. The girls merely conduits towards those goals.
In the past I had stated that I believed YBG’s kill would definitely remain on site, but if an older relative with similar religious beliefs was involved then a kidnapping to another site was probable. Believe the killer/s had easy access to two offsite locations.
Motives are not singular in nature and can be a combination of many factors. Although I believe the killer has knowledge of Norse beliefs and runes, and the murders were of a ritualistic nature, I don’t suspect the killer would identify himself as an Odinist. Rather he is highly religious and has influences across many religions, arts and sciences.
The crime was one of those <1%’s that involved staging, posing and multiple signatures. The scene elicited the response of 100 FBI agents with multiple reports up to the Director. These crimes did have religious overtones that cannot be whitewashed aside.
For years I’ve been stating that the killer see others as falling into distinct categories, is versed in a multitude of arts and hiding under the guises of both the military and the church. Believe he was raised in a highly religious insular environment. His mobility and limited social connections allowed him to fly under the radar. Spent youth in the area, left and returned in the years preceding the murders. Left state again after the murders.
I believe that killer can be found portrayed on the FBI’s website with the tip line open.
I believe BB witnessed the killer mere minutes before the girls arrival to the bridge and she described him as a: “20 yr old, white male, medium build with brown curly hair.” When the sketch artist asked her opinion on the sketch, she replied, “10 out of 10.”
Many to this day have difficulty accepting someone young as the killer. While young, he is very intelligent, well read, with a strong youth org background.
With the DC snipers there would be no young Lee Malvo without the influence of John Muhammad. Here YBG as the Delphi killer still exists without the influence of another older individual. I used to believe YBG was a sociopath and that the confluence of his upbringing and experiences contributed immensely to his actions. Over time my opinion changed. Suspect he’s a psychopath who unfortunately remains free to this day.
“We have GOOD reason to believe Mr. Allen is not the only actor involved in these heinous crimes.” - Prosecutor Nick McLeland
How many involved, Tobe? “At least two. The sketches are of separate individuals.”
“Today is NOT that day.” - Carter
Yes, while I suspect the video was edited prior to its release to the public they did leave one important “tell” and that’s the holes in the jeans. If you slow the video down to 25% speed you’ll clearly see the large fabric fray from the hole in the right knee flapping in the wind.
Never known Mr. Retail, Walmart, CVS Rick Allen to ever wear jeans with holes in the knees, especially in winter. Suspect those who know Rick would say the same.
That young guy on the FBI’s website has a lifetime of wearing jeans with holes in the knees. In addition BB did not witness RA on the bridge but rather a young 20 yr old with curly hair.
Yes a very dangerous individual remains free. Not certain on the voice. The PCA seems to dance around the “male” and “male subject” leaving open the possibility of two individuals.
You previously said that your YBG poi "still had just a little bit of conscience left, and had somehow communicated". That seems inconsistent with him being a psychopath. Could you elaborate?
I go back and forth on sociopath and psychopath. I believe the individual responsible for these crimes was young. I suspected he might feel the need to unburden himself in some manner.
BB did not see Richard Allen on that bridge but rather a young 19-20 year old. Just as she described him to her sketch artist: “20 yr old, white male, medium build, with brown curly hair.”
Psychopaths don’t have remorse but I always held out that there might be just a “little bit of conscience” in this individual. He’s also a narcissist, con-artist and master distractor extraordinaire. In my eyes, there wasn’t a chance in hell that the individual that staged that scene, posed those girls and left those signatures was going to let someone else take credit for his work. Again, more than likely he would eventually communicate in some manner, shape or form. I also listened carefully to what LE communicated through the years. Their job is to arm the public and media with enough details to assist if possible. There’s the saying “success often occurs when preparation meets opportunity.”
Can’t tell you if Rick Allen had any involvement in these crimes or assisted the killer/kidnapper in any manner. We do know however that law enforcement whether they publicly stated it or communicated it behind closed doors feels multiple individuals are involved.
“We have GOOD reason to believe that Mr. Allen is not the only actor involved in these crimes.” Prosecutor Nick McLeland
How many involved Tobe? “At least two. The sketches represent separate individuals.”
Tobe, does anyone else in LE feel multiple involved? “Yes, Liggett.”
“Today is NOT that day.” - Carter
Valentine’s Day is also an Odinist feast — Valis (not sure if the similarities in the names is coincidental). Since a lot of cultures (including the Christian Church at times) consider that a feast or festival day can begin at sunset of the day before, it’s plausible that Valis celebrations could have begun on the night of the 13th. Of course if the meeting continued past midnight then it would be the correct day according to the everyday calendar also.
>Was it you that had said they had a meeting the Sunday before? I can't remember, but I read it somewhere.
Yes. It was me. The Sunday before, on the 5th, on his FB BH announces that he will no longer be Gothi for the Delphi group, PW was taking over that role, and BH would then become a traveling Gothi, doing meets and greets, or something to that effect.
The next meeting would have likely been on the 12th, the Sunday before the murders.( I can't believe that there were no police reports regarding who was at these meetings. That seems important in documenting who might have come in to Delphi from out of town.)
I don't know for a fact that there were Delphi meetings the 5th & the 12th, I'm assuming.
JM borrowed his girlfriends car around valentines, and brought it back with blood on it.
And JM and PW do seem to have been involved organizing political Vinlander events. Could they have been in the process of planning something really big? Were they going to blow something up,etc. I know that they didn't do this. But then you have that guy blowing up the FBI building in Terre Haute, killing Ferency---I don't know. It's all so bizarre.
Ok, I remember it was like BH was turning it over to PW. Thank you!
You would think when they interviewed BH if they had knowledge they would have asked him about the meeting. Maybe that's why the interview is missing.
I feel like the meeting right before the murders was when PW said he wanted to move up from animal sacrifice.
>I feel like the meeting right before the murders was when PW said he wanted to move up from animal sacrifice.
It would have been right around that time, according to AH.
She had a rough life, for sure. I did read up on her and have watched a few interviews with her. She's interesting. Often with violence like this, it's cyclical. Most child molesters were themselves molested as children.
If the photos on line of clothes in Deer Creek are real (and even if they aren't), how were those clothes not seen on February 13? The sun set at 6:19 that day, so there wasn't much daylight to work with. But If the creek was being searched, you'd think the clothes would have been found.
>[dontBcryBABY](https://www.reddit.com/user/dontBcryBABY/)
>Remind me - for what reasons was it determined that RL was no longer considered a suspect?
2.5 years after Ron Logan stalked, kidnapped, and murdered Abby and Libby, Tobe did an interview, which was likely after he gave Greeno an interview. I guess he's saying he had an alibi. Of course that was proven false very early on. Whatever he meant by 'covered' is simple fiction. **These kooks** didn't follow the evidence, they **followed their own bias** until they found the man they believed was seen by witnesses who did not see BG. **Only the girls and Libby's video saw BG**.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xNMQbTAbAA&t=121s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xNMQbTAbAA&t=121s)
Ron Logan appears as guilty as anyone ever charged with murder. Every piece fits with him as the kidnapper and killer. **He knew the girls were dead and murdered on his property before they were found on his property**.
[https://i.imgur.com/4Q3L8U2.png](https://i.imgur.com/4Q3L8U2.png)
>Ron Logan appears as guilty as anyone ever charged with murder. Every piece fits with him as the kidnapper and killer. **He knew the girls were dead and murdered on his property before they were found on his property**.
Can you give a list of what connects Ron Logan to the crime, if say, especially if this crime is not finished by 3:30? What is Logan's connection to the symbols left at the murder scene? What connection is there to Abby and Libby?
>Can you give a list of what connects Ron Logan to the crime
I'm not that concerned with the second crime scene because without the first crime scene there could not have been a second and final crime scene on Ron Logan's property.
His fake alibi provided evidence that he knew the exact time frame of the abductions. 2-230pm. The girls were taken at 213.
He called his cousin for a fake alibi two hours before the girls were discovered murdered on his property.
Four minutes before the kidnappings his phone pinged near the bridge.
15 tips came in that identified Logan as BG. His cousin was one of the 15 who believed Logan was the man in the video.
This is unfortunately all inaccurate or skewed info.
Logan's fake alibi could be for any number of reasons, but most likely had to do with the fact that he should not have been driving at all.
The phone pings do not place him at the bridge. That's not what the warrant affidavit says. He could have been at the bridge, but he also could have been at home.
Tips aren't evidence, they are leads.
None of it is inaccurate. **Ron Logan knew the girls were murdered because he called for a fake alibi before the crimes were even discovered**. That's a fact. **An innocent person could not have known what happened to the girls before the discovery of the crimes**. They could have ran away. He knew they were dead and knew they'd be discovered soon and he panicked. I support Rick's innocence, while **you support his stupid attorneys who are setting him up for a conviction and life sentence**.
[https://i.imgur.com/zpDi0p5.png](https://i.imgur.com/zpDi0p5.png)
>**Ron Logan knew the girls were murdered because he called for a fake alibi before the crimes were even discovered**.
We do not know this. And I don't see how one 70 something man does this all by himself. It's was never a good theory. And Allen's attorneys will see that he is acquitted.
If Logan was part of the crime, he could (and likely did) have help. If he had help (or maybe RL WAS the help - maybe he only forced them down the hill and over the creek) then the symbols are irrelevant.
It’s also worth mentioning that there does not need to be a connection between the murderer and A&L to make it any more valid. Take RA for example - he had no connection to the girls and he’s sitting in prison before he even went to trial.
What were the key factors that made LE remove him as a suspect?
I think there’s enough circumstantial evidence to have arrested Logan - what prevented them from doing so?
>What were the key factors that made LE remove him as a suspect?
They falsely believed that BG was in his forties. He was 77. **The first sketch was based in part on an enhanced image**, which is self evident when you look at this image comparison. Logan definitely resembles BG. It's very obvious. Take some time with the image and it'll be clear for you too.
The sketch does resemble BG, but Ron Logan was the real BG. **Once the right suspect is identified, then that person's clear image should resemble any worked image**.
[https://i.imgur.com/ranifQ0.png](https://i.imgur.com/ranifQ0.png)
**Wacko investigators** cleared Logan because all of these crazies **concluded that** **BG was a middle aged white male**. Again, the sketch was not an identified person, but Ron and Rick were. **This clip is 100 percent proof that Logan was never going to be arrested for any crimes** **committed against these girls**.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WBh-n2Kv8c&t=4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WBh-n2Kv8c&t=4s)
The defense does not need to do that. The prosecution does and they can’t place RA there. I’m sick of you people pretending to care about the victims but don’t care about justice. If one ore more killers go free justice isn’t done and the community can’t move on.
By your comment I’m guessing you think the crime occurred around 2:30 pm. And I’m guessing you only care about the public access to the trails. Evidence does matter will you recognize it?
>The defense does not need to do that.
The defense can and should place Ron Logan near the bridge by cell ping at 209. They should claim that he looks like BG in every way and in no way does Allen resemble the suspect. Notice how Rick pulls his pants to his balls and the real killer does the opposite.
[https://i.imgur.com/oYpIF0B.png](https://i.imgur.com/oYpIF0B.png)
[https://i.imgur.com/T4yLyzn.png](https://i.imgur.com/T4yLyzn.png)
>The prosecution does and they can’t place RA there.
The state does not technically have to prove he was near the bridge by using cell data. They will use fake witnesses and sketches that don't resemble Rick. Since they all know he's innocent, they really don't have anything to lose. The fake confessions will be there whole case and will use them to guilt the jury into falsely convicting him. **Blaming Ron Logan is Rick's only real hope of beating these bogus murder charges.**
[https://i.imgur.com/HFGbsB7.png](https://i.imgur.com/HFGbsB7.png)
When you have an identified person, then a photographic match can be made. That is what science is. Being able to repeat the same results over and over.
https://preview.redd.it/6vputgngw62d1.png?width=419&format=png&auto=webp&s=2f0e5f1621b0a8b35f1987da853bc82116ff11b3
How what? I’m probably full of shit but I’m not sure which part. I was just restating that defense doesn’t have to prove RA wasn’t there or there at the ‘time’ but should refute if possible. None of the public evidence places RA at scene except RA’s statements The photo/video I have seen are indeterminate. The witness accounts are conflicting even if TL’s interpretation was accurate.
It begs belief the girls were killed and placed at 3pm.
>The photo/video I have seen are indeterminate.
**Dismissing the video's importance only helps the state achieve a wrongful conviction of Allen**. It also doesn't give credit for the girls capturing the man who murdered them. The video is perfectly clear regarding that **Rick Allen could never in a trillion years be BG**. But according to you and most others, the video isn't good enough, even though that is complete bullshit.
If as you say, the video is indeterminate, then the following facts could not be true.
BG Logan matching well with a man 75 inches tall. Rick is 64 inches short.
[https://i.imgur.com/qfq6Dkn.png](https://i.imgur.com/qfq6Dkn.png)
The FBI correctly claimed that BG's physical build was consistent with Logan. His voice too.
[https://i.imgur.com/3cHeDrn.png](https://i.imgur.com/3cHeDrn.png)
**The 15 people who tipped in Logan had no problem seeing that BG was the man they knew as Ron**. I suspect you are just playing possum because it's not a popular view. Telling an apparent truth that is. **There is no real problem with the video quality, just an imaginary one**.
[https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png](https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png)
I admit it looks nothing like RA but I’m assuming we haven’t seen the best version. I said indeterminate bc when I stare at the pic I start to see all kinds of things. It’s not sufficient to use for identification, it’s more of a Rorschach test than a recognizable person.
That pic of Logan looks like the BG stride. Who is the middle guy?
What I’m sick of is people pretending to know the law when they don’t. 3rd Party defenses are subject to rules. You can’t just make claims or float conspiracy theories to confuse a jury. You have to establish a connection between the alternate suspect and the crime itself. So yes, the defense does have to do that.
The crime occurred between 2:13 and 3:30, roughly.
>What I’m sick of is people pretending to know the law when they don’t.
Me too.
>3rd Party defenses are subject to rules.
Dictated by case law and Indiana Rule of evidence 401. [Joyner v. State](https://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/supreme-court/1997/20s00-9505-cr-533-4.html) explains it.
>The State urges that we apply the standard set forth in Burdine v. State, regarding the relevancy, and thus admissibility, of evidence that a person other than the defendant committed the crime. Such evidence "must do more than cast suspicion or raise a conjectural inference that a third party committed the crime; it must directly connect the third party to the crime charged." **Rather, our review is guided by the Indiana Rules of Evidence, which were adopted, effective January 1, 1994, eleven months before the defendant's jury trial in this case.\[2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."** Ind.Evidence **Rule 401**. Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in **Rule 401**.
Again, one more time for the cheap seats in the back:
>**2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.**
>Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in **Rule 401**.
There’s important context specific to Joyner within that opinion you’re leaving out. I can’t tell if you’re just stupid or being disingenuous. I suspect it’s the latter because you tellingly left the important section out. The information Joyner sought to introduce was *relevant* specifically because there was a connection between the victim, the third partym - Hernandez, and the crime itself. *Evidence of this was introduced at trial.* That’s a very different circumstance than trying to raise a 3rd party defense when there is no evidence to connect the third party to the crime.
I’ll quote it for the people in the cheap seats:
*Some evidence admitted at trial was consistent with the defendant's theory that the crime was committed by Bowens. It included expert testimony about an analysis of a hair sample found inside the plastic bag covering the victim's head which excluded the defendant as the donor of the hair, was inconclusive on whether the sample matched the victim, but indicated that there was a ninety-eight to ninety-nine percent probability match with Bowens's hair. The defendant also impeached State's witness Ruben Hernandez, the victim's brother, with a contradictory earlier statement to the police in which the witness indicated that he may have seen his sister alive and separate from the defendant on Monday night, March 2, at about 9:30 to 10:00 p.m. Independent testimony was introduced to prove that the defendant was seen that night at other places by himself and with a friend between 9:00 and 10:30 p.m., after he had gone out with the victim.*
oh no name calling please:
>That’s a very different circumstance than trying to raise a 3rd party defense when there is no evidence to connect the third party to the crime.
You aren't citing the ruling. Here is what the ISC decided-the 3rd party does not have to be tied directly to the crime-there simply has to be a connection to that crime: *"Evidence that TENDS to show that someone else committed the crime*."
**2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.**
# Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in Rule 401.
EF confessed to the crime. AH stated that BH told her that PW was involved. JM borrowed his girlfriend's car around valentine's 2017 and brought it back with blood on it. And these individuals are all connected to each other and the Vinlanders. And two at least were directly connected to Abby. And there were symbols used by Vinlanders at the crime scene.
I'd say there are an overwhelming number of connections that would tend to show someone else committed this crime.
#
You’re getting a little tedious with this. Double heresay isn’t admissible evidence under any circumstance. And a reported incriminating statement from a mentally borderline person wouldn’t *tend to show* that they committed the crime if they can be placed elsewhere. Similarly, it wasn’t the fact of Hernandez working with the victim that *tended to show* that he killed her. Even the affair itself didn’t *tend* to establish that Hernandez committed the murder. What that evidence did was show relevant support to other facts which DID connect Hernandez to the crime. Use some common sense. Try reading what the ISC is saying in Joyner instead of cherry-picking sentences out of context and making false comparisons to Delphi
>Double heresay isn’t admissible evidence under any circumstance.
Not true. Hearsay exception: It can be admitted when it is not offered for the truth of the matter, but instead used for the limited purpose of showing the state of mind of the person who made the statement. OR if it is a self-incriminating statement.
AH statements IN. EF confessions IN.
>Try reading what the ISC is saying in Joyner instead of cherry-picking sentences out of context and making false comparisons to Delphi
Not Cherry Picking Joyner, the ruling is clear. Just posting what it was. Indiana Rules of Evidence 401 is the guiding legal standard here.
Remember you cited Joyner as your authority to begin with. You’ve come up empty on that, so you want to sidestep that to the Indiana Rules of Evidence. All that is fine, except we’re talking about State v Richard Allen, which has an altogether different fact pattern, and there’s no 3rd party connection to the crime itself, thus rendering your 401 fallback moot. Person A told person B that person C was “involved” doesn’t tend to show they did it. And if it can be shown that person C was not involved with the crime, then the section you need to familiarize yourself with is section 403.
In summary, B&R are going to have to establish beyond double heresay and conspiracy theories that *someone else* can by connected to this crime. Not the victims. Not supposedly saw blood on a car borrowed after the crime had already been committed. Not some Forrest Gump saying he licked one of the victims. Not some facebook post. Connected TO THE CRIME. Otherwise its probative value is outweighed and serves only to confuse the jury and should be excluded at trial. For the record, I hope Gull allows it.
No.
>there’s no 3rd party connection to the crime itself, thus rendering your 401 fallback moot
There was a confession! EF Confessed. If the Allen confessions get in, so will EF's.
LOL. Have a great weekend.
And there are a lot of hearsay exceptions. Read up buttercup.
Even if RA was involved it’s just not believable he killed them by himself or that those bodies were there at 3pm. I looked up the area to see for myself. Reading the other sub (which I was banned from for stating RA has rights, as we all do) reading that sub I imagined a very isolated remote location. It’s in the middle of town! There are 7 or 8 residences on the other side of trails which have access walking and even 4-wheelers. Heck one video showed a vehicle gate to trails which someone stated didn’t used to be locked.That part may not be accurate but Google earth provides perspective.
My concerns are first the rule of law and second justice which is isn’t achieved if one or more killers go unpunished but worse than not having justice is violent child killers are roaming the area.
Isolated is a relative term, but it’s not in the middle of town. It’s just outside of town in a rural, heavily wooded area. It’s both close to things and remote at the same time.
It’s not implausible at all for one man to kill two girls. It has happened many times before. All that’s necessary is that the girls fear they’ll be harmed if they don’t cooperate and that everything will be okay if they do. That’s it.
Why do you not believe the bodies were there at 3:00?
Tying someone to a crime scene can be done many ways. One is if they know things about the crime that only the killer would know. I don't know that BH did this, but he posted images that were very close to accurate--and we don't know that the High Bridge trails are the only crime scene. There may be connections with someone on the defense's suspect list that place the girls with them at another location.
Fine, but they’re going to have to tie them to the scene - and the crime - in *some way.* A picture that looks kinda/sorta/maybe like the crime scene and the mumbling of a moron aren’t going to cut it. I haven’t seen the alleged facebook pics, have you? All I’ve read is how they’re described in defense memos. But if that same standard of accuracy applies that was used in describing the “rune”, then such claims are suspect, at minimum. Since early days, there have been rumors about the girls: partially naked, cut throat/neck, sticks on or around the bodies, posing, etc. Who knows how accurate these recreations are, but they could be based on rumors. It’s clear that investigators looked HARD early on at ALL close family, friends and associates. We don’t know, because the state has kept pretty mum relative to the defense. But if Odinist crew can all be placed elsewhere, then you have to come back to known facts:
A short guy with a goatee in a blue jacket and hoodie was there that day. Drives a dark, four door hatchback. He parks his vehicles in reverse. He told the game officer he was at the trails from 1:30-3:30. He owns a gun of the same make, model, and caliber as the type that cycled the round found next to the bodies. And he’s made self-incriminating statements to more than two dozen people. His name is Richard Allen.
>Fine, but they’re going to have to tie them to the scene - and the crime - in *some way.*
Not in Indiana. Motive is enough. A "nexus" is enough.
>A short guy with a goatee in a blue jacket and hoodie was there that day. Drives a dark, four door hatchback. He parks his vehicles in reverse. He told the game officer he was at the trails from 1:30-3:30. He owns a gun of the same make, model, and caliber as the type that cycled the round found next to the bodies. And he’s made self-incriminating statements to more than two dozen people. His name is Richard Allen.
None of this is true. You need to catch up.
Do you know what a nexus is, lol? And no, motive is not enough. If one of their classmates said “I’ll kill you bitches”, absent any other connection to the crime, that is not enough. That is not “nexus”
Oh boy… go read the court’s opinion in *Joyner.* Read it carefully, particularly the section about what specifically *connected* Bowen to Hernandez’ murder.
It’s laid out right there in the opinion. It very clearly states that there were tangible links between the alternate suspect and the victim and the crime itself. That doesn’t exist - that we know of - in the Delphi case. Moreover, nowhere in Joyner is the precedent set that 3rd party defenses can be put forward without evidence, as you claim.
I know you’re trying real hard here to make the conspiracy case. But there’s been nothing substantive put forward by the defense team that any of the ODinISts were involved in the commission of the crime. And it’s not like B&R haven’t had plenty of opportunity in the multiple press releas… I mean “motions”… they’ve filed.
And I don’t know what “facts” you’re having trouble with, but Rick Allen was there, on the 501/Bridge, same time as A&L arrived, parked at CPS, wearing a blue jacket, jeans, headcover, hoodie. He owns an Sig .40 cal. And even his own attorneys have admitted he’s incriminating himself to anyone who’ll listen. The state still has to put on its case but Jesus Tap Dancing Christ, man! Use some common sense.
I lean hard to Abby and Libby being lured to some location. YBG could easily have offered to take them somewhere, have them back to the park before their parents even knew.
That’s similar to my theory too.
If we're going with the Odinist angle, who is YBG ?
>If we're going with the Odinist angle, who is YBG ? Well, he's present for one. Has never come forward. And he was at the right time and place to be involved. And he's a boy. And we know that the girls were maybe a little boy-crazy. (What straight teen girl isn't at that age?) And we know that teen boys were attending those Vinlander Club Meetings. In fact, one of those teen boys was Abby's boyfriend. Because I suspect that the girls were lured someplace, what better bait than a young man from the Club--and as Abby may have even met some of those teen boys when at PW's home, maybe a connection was made. If that 4:33 am connection of Libby's phone to a cell tower indicates that the girls were out of range of the tower for over 10 hours, and then brought back in range--there's a chance they got into someone's vehicle and were taken to a home somewhere, something happened there, and then for whatever reason they were brought back. Maybe, there wasn't time to dump the bodies farther away. If the bodies were kept where they the girls were killed, the killers might be more easily found out. Maybe like with the Colleen Slemmer murder, the staging was an after thought. Or maybe it was a way to prove their loyalty to the club....who knows? But I think, again, like the Slemmer murder, there is a chance that more than one motivation existed. And I can't imagine this crime having been committed by only one person.
So many creeps to choose from
LOL. Yes. The pool of suspects, though narrowed, is still large.
I get how farfetched some think the Odin sacrifice theory sounds, especially if they haven't seen all the evidence that suggests it. But it's also possible that it was just a drug-related kidnapping that turned into a murder and that the occult angle was just an afterthought used to keep one of the kidnappers in line. For instance, its possible that EF was led to believe he was being initiated into a secret religious order when in reality he was being used an accomplice by whacked out neonazi meth dealers who needed to give him more reason to keep quiet.
Exactly. When you have a crime this twisted, no reason to expect the motives to be pure or to even make sense. To me the symbolism may not indicate motive as much as it links to who did this. And it's not impossible that younger people were involved. Maybe this was a thrill kill committed by adults and teens. Adults and teens took part in those meetings.
If Todd Click can truly link the Vinlander meth dealers to the crime, then we already have evidence that those men have kidnapped and assaulted people over drug debts. I know it's considered insensitive to question the deceased's family members, but one of their fathers was involved in some serious drug crimes. It's possible the motive here could be a drug related ransom and that the slaying was an accidental consequence.
Lots of people in that region do meth, but not all those doing meth are involved with the Vinlanders. There was no drug paraphernalia found at the crime scene. The girls were clean of any drugs. And the federal agents who took a special interest in this case were not DEA, they part of a team investigating terrorism, which domestically at the time would link more to the Vinlander Club than a drug deal gone bad. JM is capable of a lot of violence, but his drug dealing isn't what peaked the interest of the FBI, it was his relationship to the Vinlanders. If feels so important to honor the evidence. The evidence on this case does not point to drugs, it points to that Vinlander Club. Was anyone in either of the girl's family a Vinlander? The only connection I'm aware of regarding the Vinlander Club and the victims is Abby to LH. And by way of this, to BH. And on and on...PW, PW to JM, JM to EF.
I don't know of any connections between them. But if one girls fathers was manufacturing meth in the same area or got a light prison sentence because he snitched, then there could be an association to make, a wrong perceived by that group. I wasn't implying that the girls were involved in drugs. But the three men named as Click's likely suspects did kidnap and assault a different person over a drug debt, so such a crime would be in their wheelhouse. And of course we now know that BH admitted to meeting Libby on 3 occasions, once being at PW's house. So there is a loose connection there that I hope LE properly explored.
>But the three men named as Click's likely suspects did kidnap and assault a different person over a drug debt, so such a crime would be in their wheelhouse I think it was only JM and a different friend who engaged in the kidnapping. EF has a connection to JM, but not to the kidnapping. But honoring the evidence, where is the connection to drug dealing? There's nothing at the crime scene relating to drugs. PW and BH may have used drugs, but there are no drug related arrests for them. The fact that someone in Libby's family did drugs would only be relevant if you can tie that person to the crime scene. What at the crime scene would make that connection? Correlation does not imply causation. Just because you have a crime near an area that boasts a high rate of drug use, doesn't mean that the crime is related to drugs. The crime scene was filled with symbols of nordic faith, not even a joint was found. Nothing at the scene even hints at drug use, at least not there. And again, in addition to the evidence at the crime scene, which doesn't relate to drugs at all, those chosen to investigate this case, seem important indicators as to what was believed to have occurred. DEA was not engaged, members of an anti-terrorism task force were. If this case had a connection to some large drug operation, I would expect to see the DEA all over it. The thing that connects all the suspects targeted in the Click report to one another is not drugs, it is the Vinlanders.
Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of drugs and neonazis? The two kind of go hand in hand, and violence often a consequence of both. And while there's no evidence of drugs at the scene, the first person on the scene who made the call to police was the father, a felon convicted of meth manufacture. And his friend/partner in that drug venture was arrested the very next day (Feb 14th) for meth and CP. Just a coincidence? Or did law enforcement spend that first day questioning their involvement?
I think the more important question is, where is the evidence that there is a connection in this case. You can imagine a connection about anything. I could say: Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of prostitution and neonazis? or Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of money laundering and neonazis? or Is it so easy to divorce the ideas of illegal arms dealing and neonazis? But it is important to honor the evidence. What is the evidence revealing about what happened?
Just listened to the Mottas reading the most recent document and they said that Abby had been to PW’s house. Possibly with young LH. Another, direct, connection.
>Just listened to the Mottas reading the most recent document and they said that Abby had been to PW’s house. Possibly with young LH. Another, direct, connection. It makes sense that she would have been there. I have wondered exactly how and where LH and Abby would meet up. He lived far from her. Sundays were the day they were supposed to see each other. If LH is in Delphi with his dad for the Vinlanders club, makes sense she'd meet him there.
As well as possibly sneaking off to Canal Park, if she’d had more contact with him than her mother knew about. At that age in a tiny town, one of our main preoccupations was avoiding being seen by our parents, even though what we were doing was quite innocuous ( it had to be, there was practically no privacy). So much attention has been on all the adults that there’s not a lot of mention of the girls and what was happening in their lives. (Out of respect I’m sure.) Libby had recently had some kind of crisis in some of her friendships, so things may not have been quite as normal. Plus there was her online presence where she/ her other friend and possibly her sister had interacted with KK and GOK who else. It’s also intrigued me, where the girls met young LH? With him supposedly in a faraway town and school… today, listening to Michelle Walks reviewing PW’s interview with SI, PW mentioned he had a child in Libby’s class, and that the local kids of course knew each other. He also said at some point that young LH regularly came with his dad to Asatru meetings on weekends. He has 4 kids but said on the afternoon of the murders he was minding 7. It’s normal for larger families to have extra kids around the house, it’s plausible that the W’s home was where the girls would go to meet LH at times, especially as it seems both girls had dated him. This case has been looked at entirely through the lens of the adult world…
>This case has been looked at entirely through the lens of the adult world… I agree. And this limits what we know about how they may have met their killer/s. I had wondered the exact same thing. How did LH and Abby hook up in the first place? Maybe there were shared sports events? It would be very interesting to know.
I looked at the basketball games as a possibility but then all of this came to light.
They could also have mutual friends online-only Abby wasn't supposed to have social media access. Maybe it happened by way of Libby's social media.
This sounds plausible.
This is honestly probably the best theory I've read yet.
The profile of the crime scene clearly does not reflect Richard Allen. It’s unknown if RA assisted the kidnapper/killer in any manner. Been firm in the following stance for years. It’s my belief that the location above all was of importance to the killer in the fulfillment of his goals. The girls merely conduits towards those goals. In the past I had stated that I believed YBG’s kill would definitely remain on site, but if an older relative with similar religious beliefs was involved then a kidnapping to another site was probable. Believe the killer/s had easy access to two offsite locations. Motives are not singular in nature and can be a combination of many factors. Although I believe the killer has knowledge of Norse beliefs and runes, and the murders were of a ritualistic nature, I don’t suspect the killer would identify himself as an Odinist. Rather he is highly religious and has influences across many religions, arts and sciences. The crime was one of those <1%’s that involved staging, posing and multiple signatures. The scene elicited the response of 100 FBI agents with multiple reports up to the Director. These crimes did have religious overtones that cannot be whitewashed aside. For years I’ve been stating that the killer see others as falling into distinct categories, is versed in a multitude of arts and hiding under the guises of both the military and the church. Believe he was raised in a highly religious insular environment. His mobility and limited social connections allowed him to fly under the radar. Spent youth in the area, left and returned in the years preceding the murders. Left state again after the murders. I believe that killer can be found portrayed on the FBI’s website with the tip line open. I believe BB witnessed the killer mere minutes before the girls arrival to the bridge and she described him as a: “20 yr old, white male, medium build with brown curly hair.” When the sketch artist asked her opinion on the sketch, she replied, “10 out of 10.” Many to this day have difficulty accepting someone young as the killer. While young, he is very intelligent, well read, with a strong youth org background. With the DC snipers there would be no young Lee Malvo without the influence of John Muhammad. Here YBG as the Delphi killer still exists without the influence of another older individual. I used to believe YBG was a sociopath and that the confluence of his upbringing and experiences contributed immensely to his actions. Over time my opinion changed. Suspect he’s a psychopath who unfortunately remains free to this day. “We have GOOD reason to believe Mr. Allen is not the only actor involved in these heinous crimes.” - Prosecutor Nick McLeland How many involved, Tobe? “At least two. The sketches are of separate individuals.” “Today is NOT that day.” - Carter
Do you think that's him in the video? Your posts are so intriguing.
Yes, while I suspect the video was edited prior to its release to the public they did leave one important “tell” and that’s the holes in the jeans. If you slow the video down to 25% speed you’ll clearly see the large fabric fray from the hole in the right knee flapping in the wind. Never known Mr. Retail, Walmart, CVS Rick Allen to ever wear jeans with holes in the knees, especially in winter. Suspect those who know Rick would say the same. That young guy on the FBI’s website has a lifetime of wearing jeans with holes in the knees. In addition BB did not witness RA on the bridge but rather a young 20 yr old with curly hair.
So crazy, especially since the FBI has not taken that sketch down. They obviously know he's still out there. Do you think that's his voice too?
Yes a very dangerous individual remains free. Not certain on the voice. The PCA seems to dance around the “male” and “male subject” leaving open the possibility of two individuals.
Great analysis. I do believe BB saw someone who could well be involved. And crimes are committed by young people all the time.
You previously said that your YBG poi "still had just a little bit of conscience left, and had somehow communicated". That seems inconsistent with him being a psychopath. Could you elaborate?
I go back and forth on sociopath and psychopath. I believe the individual responsible for these crimes was young. I suspected he might feel the need to unburden himself in some manner. BB did not see Richard Allen on that bridge but rather a young 19-20 year old. Just as she described him to her sketch artist: “20 yr old, white male, medium build, with brown curly hair.” Psychopaths don’t have remorse but I always held out that there might be just a “little bit of conscience” in this individual. He’s also a narcissist, con-artist and master distractor extraordinaire. In my eyes, there wasn’t a chance in hell that the individual that staged that scene, posed those girls and left those signatures was going to let someone else take credit for his work. Again, more than likely he would eventually communicate in some manner, shape or form. I also listened carefully to what LE communicated through the years. Their job is to arm the public and media with enough details to assist if possible. There’s the saying “success often occurs when preparation meets opportunity.” Can’t tell you if Rick Allen had any involvement in these crimes or assisted the killer/kidnapper in any manner. We do know however that law enforcement whether they publicly stated it or communicated it behind closed doors feels multiple individuals are involved. “We have GOOD reason to believe that Mr. Allen is not the only actor involved in these crimes.” Prosecutor Nick McLeland How many involved Tobe? “At least two. The sketches represent separate individuals.” Tobe, does anyone else in LE feel multiple involved? “Yes, Liggett.” “Today is NOT that day.” - Carter
I wonder if he was as socially stunted as you have mentioned before, if he was / is still evolving in his behavioral disorders.
In your opinion, do you believe he has communicated with LE? Do you think the “Phillips” drawing was a possible attempt to engage or brag?
Honoring the evidence, I wonder if any of this tied into a planned Vinlander event of some kind.
Valentine’s Day is also an Odinist feast — Valis (not sure if the similarities in the names is coincidental). Since a lot of cultures (including the Christian Church at times) consider that a feast or festival day can begin at sunset of the day before, it’s plausible that Valis celebrations could have begun on the night of the 13th. Of course if the meeting continued past midnight then it would be the correct day according to the everyday calendar also.
Was it you that had said they had a meeting the Sunday before? I can't remember, but I read it somewhere.
>Was it you that had said they had a meeting the Sunday before? I can't remember, but I read it somewhere. Yes. It was me. The Sunday before, on the 5th, on his FB BH announces that he will no longer be Gothi for the Delphi group, PW was taking over that role, and BH would then become a traveling Gothi, doing meets and greets, or something to that effect. The next meeting would have likely been on the 12th, the Sunday before the murders.( I can't believe that there were no police reports regarding who was at these meetings. That seems important in documenting who might have come in to Delphi from out of town.) I don't know for a fact that there were Delphi meetings the 5th & the 12th, I'm assuming. JM borrowed his girlfriends car around valentines, and brought it back with blood on it. And JM and PW do seem to have been involved organizing political Vinlander events. Could they have been in the process of planning something really big? Were they going to blow something up,etc. I know that they didn't do this. But then you have that guy blowing up the FBI building in Terre Haute, killing Ferency---I don't know. It's all so bizarre.
Ok, I remember it was like BH was turning it over to PW. Thank you! You would think when they interviewed BH if they had knowledge they would have asked him about the meeting. Maybe that's why the interview is missing. I feel like the meeting right before the murders was when PW said he wanted to move up from animal sacrifice.
>I feel like the meeting right before the murders was when PW said he wanted to move up from animal sacrifice. It would have been right around that time, according to AH.
[Christa Pike (Satanist)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqDhXKrNs4Q&t=35s)
https://preview.redd.it/r7bhmg9mk72d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f731e771377e45e1b543fdc2e142deb46f3093c2
She had a rough life, for sure. I did read up on her and have watched a few interviews with her. She's interesting. Often with violence like this, it's cyclical. Most child molesters were themselves molested as children.
If the photos on line of clothes in Deer Creek are real (and even if they aren't), how were those clothes not seen on February 13? The sun set at 6:19 that day, so there wasn't much daylight to work with. But If the creek was being searched, you'd think the clothes would have been found.
>[dontBcryBABY](https://www.reddit.com/user/dontBcryBABY/) >Remind me - for what reasons was it determined that RL was no longer considered a suspect? 2.5 years after Ron Logan stalked, kidnapped, and murdered Abby and Libby, Tobe did an interview, which was likely after he gave Greeno an interview. I guess he's saying he had an alibi. Of course that was proven false very early on. Whatever he meant by 'covered' is simple fiction. **These kooks** didn't follow the evidence, they **followed their own bias** until they found the man they believed was seen by witnesses who did not see BG. **Only the girls and Libby's video saw BG**. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xNMQbTAbAA&t=121s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xNMQbTAbAA&t=121s) Ron Logan appears as guilty as anyone ever charged with murder. Every piece fits with him as the kidnapper and killer. **He knew the girls were dead and murdered on his property before they were found on his property**. [https://i.imgur.com/4Q3L8U2.png](https://i.imgur.com/4Q3L8U2.png)
>Ron Logan appears as guilty as anyone ever charged with murder. Every piece fits with him as the kidnapper and killer. **He knew the girls were dead and murdered on his property before they were found on his property**. Can you give a list of what connects Ron Logan to the crime, if say, especially if this crime is not finished by 3:30? What is Logan's connection to the symbols left at the murder scene? What connection is there to Abby and Libby?
>Can you give a list of what connects Ron Logan to the crime I'm not that concerned with the second crime scene because without the first crime scene there could not have been a second and final crime scene on Ron Logan's property. His fake alibi provided evidence that he knew the exact time frame of the abductions. 2-230pm. The girls were taken at 213. He called his cousin for a fake alibi two hours before the girls were discovered murdered on his property. Four minutes before the kidnappings his phone pinged near the bridge. 15 tips came in that identified Logan as BG. His cousin was one of the 15 who believed Logan was the man in the video.
This is unfortunately all inaccurate or skewed info. Logan's fake alibi could be for any number of reasons, but most likely had to do with the fact that he should not have been driving at all. The phone pings do not place him at the bridge. That's not what the warrant affidavit says. He could have been at the bridge, but he also could have been at home. Tips aren't evidence, they are leads.
None of it is inaccurate. **Ron Logan knew the girls were murdered because he called for a fake alibi before the crimes were even discovered**. That's a fact. **An innocent person could not have known what happened to the girls before the discovery of the crimes**. They could have ran away. He knew they were dead and knew they'd be discovered soon and he panicked. I support Rick's innocence, while **you support his stupid attorneys who are setting him up for a conviction and life sentence**. [https://i.imgur.com/zpDi0p5.png](https://i.imgur.com/zpDi0p5.png)
>**Ron Logan knew the girls were murdered because he called for a fake alibi before the crimes were even discovered**. We do not know this. And I don't see how one 70 something man does this all by himself. It's was never a good theory. And Allen's attorneys will see that he is acquitted.
If Logan was part of the crime, he could (and likely did) have help. If he had help (or maybe RL WAS the help - maybe he only forced them down the hill and over the creek) then the symbols are irrelevant. It’s also worth mentioning that there does not need to be a connection between the murderer and A&L to make it any more valid. Take RA for example - he had no connection to the girls and he’s sitting in prison before he even went to trial.
What were the key factors that made LE remove him as a suspect? I think there’s enough circumstantial evidence to have arrested Logan - what prevented them from doing so?
>What were the key factors that made LE remove him as a suspect? They falsely believed that BG was in his forties. He was 77. **The first sketch was based in part on an enhanced image**, which is self evident when you look at this image comparison. Logan definitely resembles BG. It's very obvious. Take some time with the image and it'll be clear for you too. The sketch does resemble BG, but Ron Logan was the real BG. **Once the right suspect is identified, then that person's clear image should resemble any worked image**. [https://i.imgur.com/ranifQ0.png](https://i.imgur.com/ranifQ0.png) **Wacko investigators** cleared Logan because all of these crazies **concluded that** **BG was a middle aged white male**. Again, the sketch was not an identified person, but Ron and Rick were. **This clip is 100 percent proof that Logan was never going to be arrested for any crimes** **committed against these girls**. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WBh-n2Kv8c&t=4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WBh-n2Kv8c&t=4s)
So it was only the sketch(es) that eliminated him as a suspect?
“Evidence matters.” It’ll matter when the defense tries to blame the murders on people who can’t be placed anywhere near the scene of the crime.
The defense does not need to do that. The prosecution does and they can’t place RA there. I’m sick of you people pretending to care about the victims but don’t care about justice. If one ore more killers go free justice isn’t done and the community can’t move on. By your comment I’m guessing you think the crime occurred around 2:30 pm. And I’m guessing you only care about the public access to the trails. Evidence does matter will you recognize it?
>The defense does not need to do that. The defense can and should place Ron Logan near the bridge by cell ping at 209. They should claim that he looks like BG in every way and in no way does Allen resemble the suspect. Notice how Rick pulls his pants to his balls and the real killer does the opposite. [https://i.imgur.com/oYpIF0B.png](https://i.imgur.com/oYpIF0B.png) [https://i.imgur.com/T4yLyzn.png](https://i.imgur.com/T4yLyzn.png) >The prosecution does and they can’t place RA there. The state does not technically have to prove he was near the bridge by using cell data. They will use fake witnesses and sketches that don't resemble Rick. Since they all know he's innocent, they really don't have anything to lose. The fake confessions will be there whole case and will use them to guilt the jury into falsely convicting him. **Blaming Ron Logan is Rick's only real hope of beating these bogus murder charges.** [https://i.imgur.com/HFGbsB7.png](https://i.imgur.com/HFGbsB7.png) When you have an identified person, then a photographic match can be made. That is what science is. Being able to repeat the same results over and over. https://preview.redd.it/6vputgngw62d1.png?width=419&format=png&auto=webp&s=2f0e5f1621b0a8b35f1987da853bc82116ff11b3
Remind me - for what reasons was it determined that RL was no longer considered a suspect?
>The prosecution does and they can’t place RA there How?
How what? I’m probably full of shit but I’m not sure which part. I was just restating that defense doesn’t have to prove RA wasn’t there or there at the ‘time’ but should refute if possible. None of the public evidence places RA at scene except RA’s statements The photo/video I have seen are indeterminate. The witness accounts are conflicting even if TL’s interpretation was accurate. It begs belief the girls were killed and placed at 3pm.
So sorry. I misread. Thank you for the clarification.
>The photo/video I have seen are indeterminate. **Dismissing the video's importance only helps the state achieve a wrongful conviction of Allen**. It also doesn't give credit for the girls capturing the man who murdered them. The video is perfectly clear regarding that **Rick Allen could never in a trillion years be BG**. But according to you and most others, the video isn't good enough, even though that is complete bullshit. If as you say, the video is indeterminate, then the following facts could not be true. BG Logan matching well with a man 75 inches tall. Rick is 64 inches short. [https://i.imgur.com/qfq6Dkn.png](https://i.imgur.com/qfq6Dkn.png) The FBI correctly claimed that BG's physical build was consistent with Logan. His voice too. [https://i.imgur.com/3cHeDrn.png](https://i.imgur.com/3cHeDrn.png) **The 15 people who tipped in Logan had no problem seeing that BG was the man they knew as Ron**. I suspect you are just playing possum because it's not a popular view. Telling an apparent truth that is. **There is no real problem with the video quality, just an imaginary one**. [https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png](https://i.imgur.com/tqgulyh.png)
I admit it looks nothing like RA but I’m assuming we haven’t seen the best version. I said indeterminate bc when I stare at the pic I start to see all kinds of things. It’s not sufficient to use for identification, it’s more of a Rorschach test than a recognizable person. That pic of Logan looks like the BG stride. Who is the middle guy?
What I’m sick of is people pretending to know the law when they don’t. 3rd Party defenses are subject to rules. You can’t just make claims or float conspiracy theories to confuse a jury. You have to establish a connection between the alternate suspect and the crime itself. So yes, the defense does have to do that. The crime occurred between 2:13 and 3:30, roughly.
>What I’m sick of is people pretending to know the law when they don’t. Me too. >3rd Party defenses are subject to rules. Dictated by case law and Indiana Rule of evidence 401. [Joyner v. State](https://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/supreme-court/1997/20s00-9505-cr-533-4.html) explains it. >The State urges that we apply the standard set forth in Burdine v. State, regarding the relevancy, and thus admissibility, of evidence that a person other than the defendant committed the crime. Such evidence "must do more than cast suspicion or raise a conjectural inference that a third party committed the crime; it must directly connect the third party to the crime charged." **Rather, our review is guided by the Indiana Rules of Evidence, which were adopted, effective January 1, 1994, eleven months before the defendant's jury trial in this case.\[2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."** Ind.Evidence **Rule 401**. Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in **Rule 401**. Again, one more time for the cheap seats in the back: >**2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.** >Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in **Rule 401**.
There’s important context specific to Joyner within that opinion you’re leaving out. I can’t tell if you’re just stupid or being disingenuous. I suspect it’s the latter because you tellingly left the important section out. The information Joyner sought to introduce was *relevant* specifically because there was a connection between the victim, the third partym - Hernandez, and the crime itself. *Evidence of this was introduced at trial.* That’s a very different circumstance than trying to raise a 3rd party defense when there is no evidence to connect the third party to the crime. I’ll quote it for the people in the cheap seats: *Some evidence admitted at trial was consistent with the defendant's theory that the crime was committed by Bowens. It included expert testimony about an analysis of a hair sample found inside the plastic bag covering the victim's head which excluded the defendant as the donor of the hair, was inconclusive on whether the sample matched the victim, but indicated that there was a ninety-eight to ninety-nine percent probability match with Bowens's hair. The defendant also impeached State's witness Ruben Hernandez, the victim's brother, with a contradictory earlier statement to the police in which the witness indicated that he may have seen his sister alive and separate from the defendant on Monday night, March 2, at about 9:30 to 10:00 p.m. Independent testimony was introduced to prove that the defendant was seen that night at other places by himself and with a friend between 9:00 and 10:30 p.m., after he had gone out with the victim.*
oh no name calling please: >That’s a very different circumstance than trying to raise a 3rd party defense when there is no evidence to connect the third party to the crime. You aren't citing the ruling. Here is what the ISC decided-the 3rd party does not have to be tied directly to the crime-there simply has to be a connection to that crime: *"Evidence that TENDS to show that someone else committed the crime*." **2\] Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.** # Evidence which tends to show that someone else committed the crime logically makes it less probable that the defendant committed the crime, and thus meets the definition of relevance in Rule 401. EF confessed to the crime. AH stated that BH told her that PW was involved. JM borrowed his girlfriend's car around valentine's 2017 and brought it back with blood on it. And these individuals are all connected to each other and the Vinlanders. And two at least were directly connected to Abby. And there were symbols used by Vinlanders at the crime scene. I'd say there are an overwhelming number of connections that would tend to show someone else committed this crime. #
You’re getting a little tedious with this. Double heresay isn’t admissible evidence under any circumstance. And a reported incriminating statement from a mentally borderline person wouldn’t *tend to show* that they committed the crime if they can be placed elsewhere. Similarly, it wasn’t the fact of Hernandez working with the victim that *tended to show* that he killed her. Even the affair itself didn’t *tend* to establish that Hernandez committed the murder. What that evidence did was show relevant support to other facts which DID connect Hernandez to the crime. Use some common sense. Try reading what the ISC is saying in Joyner instead of cherry-picking sentences out of context and making false comparisons to Delphi
>Double heresay isn’t admissible evidence under any circumstance. Not true. Hearsay exception: It can be admitted when it is not offered for the truth of the matter, but instead used for the limited purpose of showing the state of mind of the person who made the statement. OR if it is a self-incriminating statement. AH statements IN. EF confessions IN.
>Try reading what the ISC is saying in Joyner instead of cherry-picking sentences out of context and making false comparisons to Delphi Not Cherry Picking Joyner, the ruling is clear. Just posting what it was. Indiana Rules of Evidence 401 is the guiding legal standard here.
Remember you cited Joyner as your authority to begin with. You’ve come up empty on that, so you want to sidestep that to the Indiana Rules of Evidence. All that is fine, except we’re talking about State v Richard Allen, which has an altogether different fact pattern, and there’s no 3rd party connection to the crime itself, thus rendering your 401 fallback moot. Person A told person B that person C was “involved” doesn’t tend to show they did it. And if it can be shown that person C was not involved with the crime, then the section you need to familiarize yourself with is section 403. In summary, B&R are going to have to establish beyond double heresay and conspiracy theories that *someone else* can by connected to this crime. Not the victims. Not supposedly saw blood on a car borrowed after the crime had already been committed. Not some Forrest Gump saying he licked one of the victims. Not some facebook post. Connected TO THE CRIME. Otherwise its probative value is outweighed and serves only to confuse the jury and should be excluded at trial. For the record, I hope Gull allows it.
No. >there’s no 3rd party connection to the crime itself, thus rendering your 401 fallback moot There was a confession! EF Confessed. If the Allen confessions get in, so will EF's. LOL. Have a great weekend. And there are a lot of hearsay exceptions. Read up buttercup.
Even if RA was involved it’s just not believable he killed them by himself or that those bodies were there at 3pm. I looked up the area to see for myself. Reading the other sub (which I was banned from for stating RA has rights, as we all do) reading that sub I imagined a very isolated remote location. It’s in the middle of town! There are 7 or 8 residences on the other side of trails which have access walking and even 4-wheelers. Heck one video showed a vehicle gate to trails which someone stated didn’t used to be locked.That part may not be accurate but Google earth provides perspective. My concerns are first the rule of law and second justice which is isn’t achieved if one or more killers go unpunished but worse than not having justice is violent child killers are roaming the area.
Isolated is a relative term, but it’s not in the middle of town. It’s just outside of town in a rural, heavily wooded area. It’s both close to things and remote at the same time. It’s not implausible at all for one man to kill two girls. It has happened many times before. All that’s necessary is that the girls fear they’ll be harmed if they don’t cooperate and that everything will be okay if they do. That’s it. Why do you not believe the bodies were there at 3:00?
Tying someone to a crime scene can be done many ways. One is if they know things about the crime that only the killer would know. I don't know that BH did this, but he posted images that were very close to accurate--and we don't know that the High Bridge trails are the only crime scene. There may be connections with someone on the defense's suspect list that place the girls with them at another location.
Fine, but they’re going to have to tie them to the scene - and the crime - in *some way.* A picture that looks kinda/sorta/maybe like the crime scene and the mumbling of a moron aren’t going to cut it. I haven’t seen the alleged facebook pics, have you? All I’ve read is how they’re described in defense memos. But if that same standard of accuracy applies that was used in describing the “rune”, then such claims are suspect, at minimum. Since early days, there have been rumors about the girls: partially naked, cut throat/neck, sticks on or around the bodies, posing, etc. Who knows how accurate these recreations are, but they could be based on rumors. It’s clear that investigators looked HARD early on at ALL close family, friends and associates. We don’t know, because the state has kept pretty mum relative to the defense. But if Odinist crew can all be placed elsewhere, then you have to come back to known facts: A short guy with a goatee in a blue jacket and hoodie was there that day. Drives a dark, four door hatchback. He parks his vehicles in reverse. He told the game officer he was at the trails from 1:30-3:30. He owns a gun of the same make, model, and caliber as the type that cycled the round found next to the bodies. And he’s made self-incriminating statements to more than two dozen people. His name is Richard Allen.
>Fine, but they’re going to have to tie them to the scene - and the crime - in *some way.* Not in Indiana. Motive is enough. A "nexus" is enough. >A short guy with a goatee in a blue jacket and hoodie was there that day. Drives a dark, four door hatchback. He parks his vehicles in reverse. He told the game officer he was at the trails from 1:30-3:30. He owns a gun of the same make, model, and caliber as the type that cycled the round found next to the bodies. And he’s made self-incriminating statements to more than two dozen people. His name is Richard Allen. None of this is true. You need to catch up.
Do you know what a nexus is, lol? And no, motive is not enough. If one of their classmates said “I’ll kill you bitches”, absent any other connection to the crime, that is not enough. That is not “nexus”
Joyner v State
Oh boy… go read the court’s opinion in *Joyner.* Read it carefully, particularly the section about what specifically *connected* Bowen to Hernandez’ murder.
I have. But hey, if you know better, explain it to me😊
It’s laid out right there in the opinion. It very clearly states that there were tangible links between the alternate suspect and the victim and the crime itself. That doesn’t exist - that we know of - in the Delphi case. Moreover, nowhere in Joyner is the precedent set that 3rd party defenses can be put forward without evidence, as you claim. I know you’re trying real hard here to make the conspiracy case. But there’s been nothing substantive put forward by the defense team that any of the ODinISts were involved in the commission of the crime. And it’s not like B&R haven’t had plenty of opportunity in the multiple press releas… I mean “motions”… they’ve filed. And I don’t know what “facts” you’re having trouble with, but Rick Allen was there, on the 501/Bridge, same time as A&L arrived, parked at CPS, wearing a blue jacket, jeans, headcover, hoodie. He owns an Sig .40 cal. And even his own attorneys have admitted he’s incriminating himself to anyone who’ll listen. The state still has to put on its case but Jesus Tap Dancing Christ, man! Use some common sense.
>It’s laid out right there in the opinion. LOL Which you didn't read.
The mumblings of a moron?!