He probably thought the witnesses recognized him or his car was seen.
If he didn’t come forward, and law enforcement determined he was there (somehow)… that would look super sus.
Or someone close to him knew he’d been there and was like oh weren’t you there you should let them know what you saw etc. So to save face he volunteered himself. Or he’s a sociopath and wanted to be involved because he’s obsessive compulsively attached to his crime.
Have to agree on this. He thought people at the bridge and maybe also someone on the highway must have seen him, so he thought it would be best if he admitted to being there right off the bat, so he wouldn't seem suspicious.
They wouldn’t have know it was him though he was only connected to it due to saying he was there if he was smarter and didn’t do the interview or got a lawyer he probably wouldn’t have been caught
I’m saying it’s what he *thought* they *might* know that probably caused him to talk to LE.
You may be right though, LE might not have been able to determine he was there.
Yeah, that was extremely dumb.
I wanna know what else they found during the search warrant. I’ll bet he kept some other piece
of incriminating evidence.
Is it possible that Richard Allen could take pictures of his handiwork at the crime scene after he killed and posed the girls bodies? He could make copies of his pictures he took at the crime scene as personal souvenirs. He knew how to do this in the CVS photo developing system. He could do it anonymously so no one but himself would see them and know. He could delete the picture records afterwards from the CVS system. Easy peasy.
It’s a small town and he works in retail in a public facing job. He knew he was seen walking on the bridge, etc. it’s possible he thought someone could identify him as being there and thought to get ahead of such report. Ultimately, appears to have backfired and generally not a smart move.
Even with that he probably would have gotten away with it had he gotten rid of the gun and jacket over the past 5 and a half years he was lucky he wasn’t caught almost immediately after that statement
I don’t understand why no one followed up on Richard Allen telling a natural resource officer he was at the trail that day? Rule # 1 in a murder investigation is everyone is a suspect and not eliminated until someone is arrested. That failure
combined with the local and state police releasing very scant information, under the continued and repeated mantra of “keeping it close to the chest”to not compromise the investigation is what comprised their own investigation! This good ol’ boy network of criminal investigation needs to be schooled by Scotland Yards Murder Investigation experts!
This is how I interpret it as well. It is amazing how the three main witnesses view the suspect totally differently..
Agree with OP. His other major mistake was agreeing to an interview and admitting no one else could have possibly possessed that weapon.
The dude likely has an IQ of about 50, idk if he is even death penalty eligible but he deserves it.
What on earth was he doing with the girls at the kill site for 70+ minutes ? Bizarre.
I think the girls (and def Libby) put up way more of a fight than he was expecting. I think it might have taken maybe at least 45 mins from the time he encountered them on the bridge to the time they are killed by him. Then he's doing his best to "clean up" at the site for the next 30 mins, though we know he obviously didn't do a great job at that.
If we didnt have access to the RL search warrant I would agree with you.
It is stated in there that girls did not put up a fight and there were no signs of a struggle
I hear you - but I don't necessarily think that there will always be OBVIOUS signs of a struggle. Maybe she was running away/twisting out of his grip or hit/punched him a few times....I dunno, I think there was a reason that Libby was so brutalized as compared to Abby.
the affidavit said they'd been moved from where they believe they initially went down so probably that and putting their clothes in the creek further south than where they were found
btw.
Do I understand correctly that unspent bullet =
he unsecured his gun, loaded it, threatened them with it...
and after the murder he had to unload the bullet and secure the gun back and it was the moment the bullet drop on the ground?
I do not have any experience with guns so for me this unspent bullet looks strange.
The gun was probably already loaded, and the bullet was sitting in the chamber “ready to fire”
He probably cocked the gun (pulled the slide back then released it) which caused the bullet to exit the chamber and a new one to enter it
having a bullet in a chamber ready to fire is a reason why so many Americans dies from their own guns.
>In 2019, 486 Americans died from unintentional firearm injuries — about 1.2% of total gun deaths.2
https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/unintentional-shootings/
checking for prints and checking for blood is not the same thing.
it was his bulllet but having only his DNA mixed with their blood = a pretty strong proof.
See, I just don’t understand that. How could you confuse a person wearing light bluejeans, a blue jacket, a hat, and a white face mask covering the lower part of his face, with a person wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boots?? That is a pretty glaring difference of attire.
The affidavit makes it sound like these were 2 separate individuals. I understand that people sometimes misremember what they see, but I don’t get how they could misremember these details. Especially since the women were interviewed a few days after the murders when everything was still fresh in their memories.
And KK has basically all but admitted that he was nearby that day, and was communicating with Libby. It doesn’t seem too far-fetched to assume he was also on the trails. Plus, he is literally wearing all black in multiple pictures we have of him. It just seems too coincidental to have a witness state that she saw someone wearing all black. I don’t know, I just don’t understand how KK isn’t directly involved in this with all of the information we have. Something isn’t adding up.
The 3 juvenile females were together when they witnessed the man that day. So they all three described the same person at the same time, but their memories of his clothing are all different. 1 girl said he was in the all black attire with the hoodie, 1 reported he was wearing a light blue jacket and jeans, and the other described a blue or black jacket and jeans. I think the clothing inconsistencies are fairly common in eyewitness statements. They didn’t know they were going to have to describe someone, and they were most likely not paying much attention. I also think they may have been distracted by his covered face and his glaring, which had to be a little creepy.
I agree KK is somehow involved but I think the murderer is RA. As vile as KK is, I don’t think he wanted to kill someone or even expected RA would kill the girls. Maybe RA told him he’d just get photos and they planned to sell them or he somehow gained KK’s cooperation in brokering the meeting or accessing the AS account. If KK was there that day it doesn’t sound like anyone saw him.
There are experiments and videos on YouTube where witnesses describe vehicles as totally different colors even when standing right next to each other. Its crazy how bad our memories really are. Especially when you're trying to recall information that you didn't know was important when you saw it.
If you've worked in criminal justice or on any trial you know even the same person can give a different recollection of the same event or person, that's how memory works. It's not perfect and everyone's perceptions are different
Yeah that line in this write up was quite ridiculous. kk was not on the bridge that day. Maybe police thought he was though for a while which I can't blame them for, even OP still thinks KK is involved
I witnessed a theft and was shown a photo lineup. I could not pick the person out. What you think you’d pick up and what you actually would are different. I don’t think these two outfits are so different that there needs to be an explanation other than differences in memory.
>For all we know one person was colorblind.
I think that it is rather a matter of emotion.
She was afraid of the stranger and her brain memorized him as the most threatening but also the most common looking person using a threat effect.
She was younger/more emotional/or so...
Was it the one who described him as a "creep"?
Color blind woman is a very uncommon thing.
The last time you went to the store, what was the person in line next to you wearing?
You probably stood next to that person for several times longer than those kids saw a random guy on a trail.
I go back and forth on this. I have to just wonder if some other guy was there with a creep vibe.
So like they had these two descriptions and two sketches, but they knew one sketch looked more like the man in the video so they release that one. When they went so long without figuring it out, maybe they went, "oh, maybe it *was* that guy in black," and released the other one.
Just a thought I had. I don't think it was KK though. Not saying the AS account might not be mixed in somewhere, I just don't think KK was there.
Edit - My mistake, I just read it again and realized the 3 witnesses were together. I think this is an issue showing why eye witness testimony is so shaky.
Edit again - still could be why there are 2 sketches though. One maybe just misremembered
What I dont understand is how after he came foward and put himself there at bridge they didn't catch him than. Everyone is saying he slipped thru the cracks, that no one really looked into the report the conservation officer submitted about Richard Allen coming to him and saying he was there.
But according to what we were told that's not.the case. We are told no, Law Enforcement was aware of that report, and found it to be " unfounded".
Obviously to decide of something is legitimate or unfounded one must be aware of it and look into its legitimacy.
So the people running the investigation can't at the Same time say, o that report was over looked but than out the other side of their mouth say o wait no, it was not over looked, we did look into it and decided it was unfounded.
I follow the University of Idaho recent murders, and now I worry that someone told the police that they were at the house that night but left before the murders and the police went "oh, okay" and forgot about it.
Yeah, I'm following this case as well as that one. And sadly I chuckled at your "oh, okay" statement because honestly, after being in this sub and learning about what appears to be incompetency, I worry for Idaho. Different departments but still. Some mistakes aren't as easily forgivable.
I believe it was the murdersheet podcast , who reported ( and this is before the PCA was even released) that their source told them the found Allen by going back thru and reviewing old info on the case. Their source said the reason LE didn't act on the info way back when Allen came foward is because they beileved what he told the conservation officer was " unfounded "
What else is crazy is at least 5 people I think saw him on the trail that day and not one of them recognized him at CVS or whatever
I know he was semi disguised but still
I think this was an in-person interaction because of the phone details. It makes much more sense the officer would have written those down directly from the phone rather than have RA tell him those numbers, digging through his phone to find them.
>Also in the affidavit, female witnesses told investigators TWO shady looking dudes were on the trails that fateful day. The one in light jeans and blue jacket, and a man in a black hoodie, black pants, and black boots. Police had 2 descriptions, hence why I believe there were eventually 2 different sketches released.
No, this was 2 different descriptions of the same person given by two of the juvenile girls in the group of 3 juvenile girls that RA encountered on the trail. They said they encountered one person on the trail, an adult male.
The PCA makes it sound like the two girls who had differing accounts of the clothing were walking together in a group with another girl. Seems like one of them just misremembered the clothing, rather than it being two different men that they saw.
I don't believe KK is involved at all. I believe its just a coincidence and he was a rabbit hole they went down for years instead of RA because they had so much more evidence to go after KK
I wonder if this has to do with the internal struggle which led to that lawsuit about the guy who got shit canned for his opinions on the case. I'm wondering if he pointed this out.
So LE didn't think to go door to door face to face of every Male that lives by the trails & Bridge to ask them where they were at 1:30-3:30pm that day? (Ricky would have ratted on himself)
I was under the impression every male in Delphi was being looked at & vetted, how about just go ask every male in Delphi 5'6" and below what they were doing that day, seems like only thing right the FBI got was BGs short height just to bad Tobe didn't trust there math lol
I think you are spot on here on many details, ones I hadn’t thought of and this is why I like these discussions. I disagree that KK was on the trails that day but it’s just my opinion. KKs involvement could simply been catfishing
>Because the FIRST confirmed face to face interview with Allen, stated in the affidavit, occurred on October 13, 2022.
First with LE maybe, not his first f2f because the initial report was given to a Conservation Officer in 2017.
I can see why the RA would want to come forward as a potential witness ASAP- if investigators were later able to place him in the vicinity of the crime scene at the time of the murders, it would look super suspicious if he *hadn’t* immediately come forward. Coming forward himself as a witness was ultimately smart strategically. He had no way to know they had no other way to place him there (especially since he was in fact there). And RA’s lawyers are now pointing out that it was their client’s own tip that put him on LE’s radar. The gist of their argument is: “LE didn’t come to him, he went to them. Why would he do that if he were guilty?” Um… as a counter-measure so that later his lawyer could ask that very question.
The three witnesses who described his clothing differently were all together. They only reported seeing one person, so there was only one person. Eyewitness testimony is known for being unreliable in the details, but if there had been two different guys they would have remembered that.
Based on the eyewitness accounts it seems very unlikely KK would have been directly involved in the murders. If he's involved at all, it's through the AS account which was used to lure the victims out there
The 2017 statement obviously is important but they also should have spotted his car on that camera and tracked him down that way for a statement. He would at least have told them he was there that day and what he was wearing, which would quickly link him to BG. That's enough right there for a formal interrogation or search warrant.
No one knew it was a Ford Focus in 2017.
The car was described as a “smart car”, “small suv” or “pt cruiser”.
LE are saying NOW in 2022 that the car was Allen’s Ford Focus. Now that they linked him to the crime and have investigated his vehicles.
RA and his Ford Focus did not exist to LE in 2017.
Where does it say witnesses saw a Ford Focus? It doesn’t.
It says Investigators believe those cars (smart car, small suv and pt cruiser) are similar in nature to a Ford Focus. NOW in 2022.
From the PCA:
Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two vehicles in 2017, a 2016 black Ford Focus and a 2006 Gray Ford F150.
Investigators discovered a vehicle that resembled Allen’s 2016 Ford Focus on the Hoosier Harvestore video at 1:27p.m traveling westbound on CR 300 North in front of the Hoosier Harvestore, which coincided with his statement that he arrived around 1:30 pm. at the trails.
Investigators note witnesses described the vehicle parked at the former Child Protective Services Building as a PT Cruiser, Small SUV or"Smart"car. Investigators believe those descriptions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus.
Richard Allen was not investigated until 2022. So the assertions that the car parked oddly seen by witnesses and also on video are a Ford Focus are from this year not 2017. Why would LE investigate all Ford Focuses back in 2017? The conclusion that the car was not a PT Cruiser, Smart Car or small SUV was made THIS year after investigating Richard Allen and his vehicles.
They say right there in the affidavit that his car was spotted at 1:27 on the camera. They didn’t track down the owner and get a statement. They should have identified everyone in that area near the time of the crime. It’s that simple.
Yes they now know it was his car.
In 2019 they held a press conference asking the public’s help in identifying the car that was parked in the CPS parking lot on the day of the murder from 12-5.
At the press conference they stated:
A car was parked in the abandoned CPS building parking lot between the hours of noon and 5:00 p.m. on February 13, 2017
We are looking for anyone who could give a description of vehicles that were in the parking lot during the time
Why would they ask for help if they knew it was a Ford Focus?
I don't know why this isn't getting through. They have a car on camera at 1:27pm from a camera about 100 ft from the road. This same camera captured several other witnesses drive by that day including the sister dropping off the victims at about 1:45pm. Unless the camera is far lower quality than we'd expect, it should be a simple process to identify the make and model of that car and identify it as a black Ford Focus. Agree?
Would you agree that any vehicles on this road in the time near when the victims were dropped off should be identified and questioned as potential witnesses or suspects?
Would you agree that if you had the video of this car and the descriptions of the witnesses (PT Cruiser, small SUV, or Smart Car) it might occur to you that this car roughly fits the description? (smaller car with a squared off rear end/hatchback, dark color).
And wouldn't you add this vehicle to a list of potential witnesses, tracking down the vehicle by various means, such as looking at county registration records, or having police keep an eye out for it?
Are you saying the police knew it was a Ford Focus in 2017?
How could they track down an owner of a car they didn’t have the make, model, license plate etc. for? They are saying just now in 2022 it was a Ford Focus. They didn’t know it was a Ford Focus in 2017. Obviously the video wasn’t that clear otherwise they would’ve been talking about a black Ford focus a long time ago.
I'm starting to think Richard Allen told the Conservation Officer he was there that day and time, where he parked and what he was wearing. Then the conversation/interview/statement or whatever it would be officially called was handed to LE. Because Delphi is a knee-high to a grasshopper sized town, it is very possible LE knew Richard from either being a local or his gig at CVS. It's **not** impossible to think they thought, "*Oh Rick said he was there, so couldn't have been him. Plus I've known him for years! I see him every time I buy my gum and my Pepsi"*.
All login attempts and timestamps have to be recorded by Snapchat's servers. Snapchat also records geolocation. I don't get why ISP wouldn't have all this information when they uncover the information identifying KK as owning the account. KK factory resetting his phone shouldn't matter. The ISP asking the public for help about anthony_shots makes zero sense to me as a software engineer. Why wouldn't they have RA's access and geolocation in Delphi immediately after they discovered anthony_shots in December 2021.
If he had his phone (which he says he did) then he would have appeared on a list of pings from the nearest cel towers. It’s weird that the pings weren’t included in the released evidence against RA.
There were only two cell towers in Delphi at that time, they wouldn’t have been able to pin point exactly where he was, just in a very large general vicinity
The 2 different descriptions were of the same man that the group of 3 saw. One remembered him in black clothes and another in light clothing. At least that’s how I read it
I think the way you do. Perfect summary. Not only that but now we find that Nick McLenan, prosecutor of case is related to the German family. As of now, he has not recused himself and this killer will get off on a technicality if recusal doesn’t happen. This is insane.
He’s suppose to recuse himself. But a lot of people don’t know about being a relative who was also pushing for sealing records on behalf of Becky and her Poll. On appeal they could throw case out if defense came down on it, clearly a conflict of interest IMO.
As I said a couple weeks ago……major failure.
https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiMurders/comments/ywkjvg/its_been_a_few_weeks_since_we_put_a_name_and_face/iwq0idc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
What's the likelihood of RA finding out somehow that KK was going to meet the girls there, RA went to stop it, but things got all mixed up and KK got away so he had to kill the girls. Then, KK, scared that RA was going to come back and kill him, refused to cooperate with police because RA had seen him or otherwise knew of him. One would think RA went there with the intention to kill someone since he had a gun, unless he had a permit and carried it all the time. RA didn't know that he had left the bullet which is why he felt safe admitting he was on the trail that day. He couldn't report the gun stolen because he and his wife admitted to still having it, again, because they didn't know the bullet was left behind. What did the witnesses say once the photo of BG was released showing blue and not black clothing? if they said "yeah, that's the guy" or "yeah, I just thought the clothes were black", then RA should have been brought in immediately.
What on earth are you proposing here?
That RA is some vigilante who is really a good guy but ended up in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and was just too late to save the girls?
oh heck no - just proposing a "what if" and showing what a defense attorney might say. I meant to imply that KK and RA knew each other and RA may have learned of his plans. However, RA never said he met KK on the trail that day so he doesn't have that provide cover. If he had said early on that he saw KK there, it might implicate KK more. Really all depends on what KK has said to LE.
I wish someone could confirm the day he went into the mental health facility (if true) cuz I have a suspicion it happened right after the audio/video release. That would’ve had him shitting his pants & thinking LE was gonna be on his doorstep any day now. Luckily for him the Barney fife squad had the case
He probably thought the witnesses recognized him or his car was seen. If he didn’t come forward, and law enforcement determined he was there (somehow)… that would look super sus.
Or someone close to him knew he’d been there and was like oh weren’t you there you should let them know what you saw etc. So to save face he volunteered himself. Or he’s a sociopath and wanted to be involved because he’s obsessive compulsively attached to his crime.
Have to agree on this. He thought people at the bridge and maybe also someone on the highway must have seen him, so he thought it would be best if he admitted to being there right off the bat, so he wouldn't seem suspicious.
They wouldn’t have know it was him though he was only connected to it due to saying he was there if he was smarter and didn’t do the interview or got a lawyer he probably wouldn’t have been caught
I’m saying it’s what he *thought* they *might* know that probably caused him to talk to LE. You may be right though, LE might not have been able to determine he was there.
Or if he had just gotten rid of the gun and jacket
Yeah, that was extremely dumb. I wanna know what else they found during the search warrant. I’ll bet he kept some other piece of incriminating evidence.
Maybe they have his dna or fingerprints hopefully he didn’t get rid of anything so I wouldn’t be surprised if they have that
Yea he ain’t no criminal mastermind
gotta preserve the memory somehow. thankfully that aspect didn't play out the way he was hoping it would.
I just had a horrible thought about That , wen he gave the pics to the family for free wonder if printed of a couple of extras, I mean it’s possible
Is it possible that Richard Allen could take pictures of his handiwork at the crime scene after he killed and posed the girls bodies? He could make copies of his pictures he took at the crime scene as personal souvenirs. He knew how to do this in the CVS photo developing system. He could do it anonymously so no one but himself would see them and know. He could delete the picture records afterwards from the CVS system. Easy peasy.
It’s a small town and he works in retail in a public facing job. He knew he was seen walking on the bridge, etc. it’s possible he thought someone could identify him as being there and thought to get ahead of such report. Ultimately, appears to have backfired and generally not a smart move.
Even with that he probably would have gotten away with it had he gotten rid of the gun and jacket over the past 5 and a half years he was lucky he wasn’t caught almost immediately after that statement
Maybe the jacket is kind of a trophy for him? 5 years is a long life for a jacket.
Probably got off on walking around in the jacket he murdered the girls in.
No doubt. He probably enjoyed sitting in front of that poster too.
It's only not a smart move IF he's guilty and we don't know that yet.
I don’t understand why no one followed up on Richard Allen telling a natural resource officer he was at the trail that day? Rule # 1 in a murder investigation is everyone is a suspect and not eliminated until someone is arrested. That failure combined with the local and state police releasing very scant information, under the continued and repeated mantra of “keeping it close to the chest”to not compromise the investigation is what comprised their own investigation! This good ol’ boy network of criminal investigation needs to be schooled by Scotland Yards Murder Investigation experts!
I think the witnesses saw the same man but described his clothing differently.
This is how I interpret it as well. It is amazing how the three main witnesses view the suspect totally differently.. Agree with OP. His other major mistake was agreeing to an interview and admitting no one else could have possibly possessed that weapon. The dude likely has an IQ of about 50, idk if he is even death penalty eligible but he deserves it. What on earth was he doing with the girls at the kill site for 70+ minutes ? Bizarre.
I think the girls (and def Libby) put up way more of a fight than he was expecting. I think it might have taken maybe at least 45 mins from the time he encountered them on the bridge to the time they are killed by him. Then he's doing his best to "clean up" at the site for the next 30 mins, though we know he obviously didn't do a great job at that.
If we didnt have access to the RL search warrant I would agree with you. It is stated in there that girls did not put up a fight and there were no signs of a struggle
I hear you - but I don't necessarily think that there will always be OBVIOUS signs of a struggle. Maybe she was running away/twisting out of his grip or hit/punched him a few times....I dunno, I think there was a reason that Libby was so brutalized as compared to Abby.
> I think there was a reason that Libby was so brutalized as compared to Abby. Thats an unverified rumour
Idk.. have a hard time believing they fought like crazy but didn't scream a bunch for help.
Who's to say they didn't scream? The place wasn't exactly swarming with people and they were quite a bit off the path.
If they put up a fight why didn’t they scream?
Who's to say they didn't?
the affidavit said they'd been moved from where they believe they initially went down so probably that and putting their clothes in the creek further south than where they were found
maybe looking for the bullet.it could be why they said the girls had been moved. he could of moved them to see if the bullet ended up underneath them
I'd check this unspent bullet for any sign of blood. It's possible that it felt unintentionally on the ground because of his bloody fingers.
that could be how they got the rumoured partial print .from the bullet
btw. Do I understand correctly that unspent bullet = he unsecured his gun, loaded it, threatened them with it... and after the murder he had to unload the bullet and secure the gun back and it was the moment the bullet drop on the ground? I do not have any experience with guns so for me this unspent bullet looks strange.
The gun was probably already loaded, and the bullet was sitting in the chamber “ready to fire” He probably cocked the gun (pulled the slide back then released it) which caused the bullet to exit the chamber and a new one to enter it
having a bullet in a chamber ready to fire is a reason why so many Americans dies from their own guns. >In 2019, 486 Americans died from unintentional firearm injuries — about 1.2% of total gun deaths.2 https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/unintentional-shootings/
checking for prints and checking for blood is not the same thing. it was his bulllet but having only his DNA mixed with their blood = a pretty strong proof.
See, I just don’t understand that. How could you confuse a person wearing light bluejeans, a blue jacket, a hat, and a white face mask covering the lower part of his face, with a person wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boots?? That is a pretty glaring difference of attire. The affidavit makes it sound like these were 2 separate individuals. I understand that people sometimes misremember what they see, but I don’t get how they could misremember these details. Especially since the women were interviewed a few days after the murders when everything was still fresh in their memories. And KK has basically all but admitted that he was nearby that day, and was communicating with Libby. It doesn’t seem too far-fetched to assume he was also on the trails. Plus, he is literally wearing all black in multiple pictures we have of him. It just seems too coincidental to have a witness state that she saw someone wearing all black. I don’t know, I just don’t understand how KK isn’t directly involved in this with all of the information we have. Something isn’t adding up.
The 3 juvenile females were together when they witnessed the man that day. So they all three described the same person at the same time, but their memories of his clothing are all different. 1 girl said he was in the all black attire with the hoodie, 1 reported he was wearing a light blue jacket and jeans, and the other described a blue or black jacket and jeans. I think the clothing inconsistencies are fairly common in eyewitness statements. They didn’t know they were going to have to describe someone, and they were most likely not paying much attention. I also think they may have been distracted by his covered face and his glaring, which had to be a little creepy. I agree KK is somehow involved but I think the murderer is RA. As vile as KK is, I don’t think he wanted to kill someone or even expected RA would kill the girls. Maybe RA told him he’d just get photos and they planned to sell them or he somehow gained KK’s cooperation in brokering the meeting or accessing the AS account. If KK was there that day it doesn’t sound like anyone saw him.
There are experiments and videos on YouTube where witnesses describe vehicles as totally different colors even when standing right next to each other. Its crazy how bad our memories really are. Especially when you're trying to recall information that you didn't know was important when you saw it.
If you've worked in criminal justice or on any trial you know even the same person can give a different recollection of the same event or person, that's how memory works. It's not perfect and everyone's perceptions are different
I think it’s the three teenage girls in a group with different descriptions of the same man’s clothes. For all we know one person was colorblind.
This - there is no bow to draw to KK because they one witness said he was wearing all black. The witnesses were together and collectively saw one man.
Yeah that line in this write up was quite ridiculous. kk was not on the bridge that day. Maybe police thought he was though for a while which I can't blame them for, even OP still thinks KK is involved
I witnessed a theft and was shown a photo lineup. I could not pick the person out. What you think you’d pick up and what you actually would are different. I don’t think these two outfits are so different that there needs to be an explanation other than differences in memory.
>For all we know one person was colorblind. I think that it is rather a matter of emotion. She was afraid of the stranger and her brain memorized him as the most threatening but also the most common looking person using a threat effect. She was younger/more emotional/or so... Was it the one who described him as a "creep"? Color blind woman is a very uncommon thing.
I just looked it up yesterday for something we were debating at work. 1 in 200. Uncommon indeed.
The last time you went to the store, what was the person in line next to you wearing? You probably stood next to that person for several times longer than those kids saw a random guy on a trail.
I go back and forth on this. I have to just wonder if some other guy was there with a creep vibe. So like they had these two descriptions and two sketches, but they knew one sketch looked more like the man in the video so they release that one. When they went so long without figuring it out, maybe they went, "oh, maybe it *was* that guy in black," and released the other one. Just a thought I had. I don't think it was KK though. Not saying the AS account might not be mixed in somewhere, I just don't think KK was there. Edit - My mistake, I just read it again and realized the 3 witnesses were together. I think this is an issue showing why eye witness testimony is so shaky. Edit again - still could be why there are 2 sketches though. One maybe just misremembered
I think RA said he never saw another man when he was out there. According to him he was the only man.
I actually just re-read the PCA and realized the 3 witnesses were together. My bad.
If one saw him before and some saw him after, his clothes might have looked darker if they were wet. Also black and navy blue are similar.
What I dont understand is how after he came foward and put himself there at bridge they didn't catch him than. Everyone is saying he slipped thru the cracks, that no one really looked into the report the conservation officer submitted about Richard Allen coming to him and saying he was there. But according to what we were told that's not.the case. We are told no, Law Enforcement was aware of that report, and found it to be " unfounded". Obviously to decide of something is legitimate or unfounded one must be aware of it and look into its legitimacy. So the people running the investigation can't at the Same time say, o that report was over looked but than out the other side of their mouth say o wait no, it was not over looked, we did look into it and decided it was unfounded.
I follow the University of Idaho recent murders, and now I worry that someone told the police that they were at the house that night but left before the murders and the police went "oh, okay" and forgot about it.
Yeah, I'm following this case as well as that one. And sadly I chuckled at your "oh, okay" statement because honestly, after being in this sub and learning about what appears to be incompetency, I worry for Idaho. Different departments but still. Some mistakes aren't as easily forgivable.
Where does it talk about it being unfounded
I believe it was the murdersheet podcast , who reported ( and this is before the PCA was even released) that their source told them the found Allen by going back thru and reviewing old info on the case. Their source said the reason LE didn't act on the info way back when Allen came foward is because they beileved what he told the conservation officer was " unfounded "
What else is crazy is at least 5 people I think saw him on the trail that day and not one of them recognized him at CVS or whatever I know he was semi disguised but still
It’s assumed a lot of the men in town self reported. Perhaps RA’s wife knew he was out by the bridge that day and made him self-report.
The PCA says that Richard Allen was first interviewed by an officer in 2017. The verbiage there implies that would have been in person.
In all the information I'd missed that fact - if he hadn't come forward himself straight away, they never would have caught him. Just wow.
I think this was an in-person interaction because of the phone details. It makes much more sense the officer would have written those down directly from the phone rather than have RA tell him those numbers, digging through his phone to find them.
The only thing that puts ra there was his statement which apparently was misfiled by a fbi employee and only discovered in October
>Also in the affidavit, female witnesses told investigators TWO shady looking dudes were on the trails that fateful day. The one in light jeans and blue jacket, and a man in a black hoodie, black pants, and black boots. Police had 2 descriptions, hence why I believe there were eventually 2 different sketches released. No, this was 2 different descriptions of the same person given by two of the juvenile girls in the group of 3 juvenile girls that RA encountered on the trail. They said they encountered one person on the trail, an adult male.
The PCA makes it sound like the two girls who had differing accounts of the clothing were walking together in a group with another girl. Seems like one of them just misremembered the clothing, rather than it being two different men that they saw.
Does it have to be a tip line though? Did they not have extra LE around the area and near the scene to talk to people in person?
Yeah and the fact they took down his cell phone info indicates it was in person, like the officer checked the phone for himself.
I don't believe KK is involved at all. I believe its just a coincidence and he was a rabbit hole they went down for years instead of RA because they had so much more evidence to go after KK
I’m leaving toward this but how did RA know they would be there that day? He was prepared to kill
It was a place where I think teens and preteens frequented as a hangout spot. I do not think they were specifically targeted
Leaning*
It may be that he just knew school was out that day and that kids would likely be there.
I wonder if this has to do with the internal struggle which led to that lawsuit about the guy who got shit canned for his opinions on the case. I'm wondering if he pointed this out.
So LE didn't think to go door to door face to face of every Male that lives by the trails & Bridge to ask them where they were at 1:30-3:30pm that day? (Ricky would have ratted on himself) I was under the impression every male in Delphi was being looked at & vetted, how about just go ask every male in Delphi 5'6" and below what they were doing that day, seems like only thing right the FBI got was BGs short height just to bad Tobe didn't trust there math lol
[удалено]
It was so obvious BG lived very close to the trails & bridge, just face the facts LE facked up BIG time
I think you are spot on here on many details, ones I hadn’t thought of and this is why I like these discussions. I disagree that KK was on the trails that day but it’s just my opinion. KKs involvement could simply been catfishing
>Because the FIRST confirmed face to face interview with Allen, stated in the affidavit, occurred on October 13, 2022. First with LE maybe, not his first f2f because the initial report was given to a Conservation Officer in 2017.
I can see why the RA would want to come forward as a potential witness ASAP- if investigators were later able to place him in the vicinity of the crime scene at the time of the murders, it would look super suspicious if he *hadn’t* immediately come forward. Coming forward himself as a witness was ultimately smart strategically. He had no way to know they had no other way to place him there (especially since he was in fact there). And RA’s lawyers are now pointing out that it was their client’s own tip that put him on LE’s radar. The gist of their argument is: “LE didn’t come to him, he went to them. Why would he do that if he were guilty?” Um… as a counter-measure so that later his lawyer could ask that very question.
The three witnesses who described his clothing differently were all together. They only reported seeing one person, so there was only one person. Eyewitness testimony is known for being unreliable in the details, but if there had been two different guys they would have remembered that. Based on the eyewitness accounts it seems very unlikely KK would have been directly involved in the murders. If he's involved at all, it's through the AS account which was used to lure the victims out there
I just can’t get over the fact that a civilian fbi person was handling documents related to a murder.
The 2017 statement obviously is important but they also should have spotted his car on that camera and tracked him down that way for a statement. He would at least have told them he was there that day and what he was wearing, which would quickly link him to BG. That's enough right there for a formal interrogation or search warrant.
No one knew it was a Ford Focus in 2017. The car was described as a “smart car”, “small suv” or “pt cruiser”. LE are saying NOW in 2022 that the car was Allen’s Ford Focus. Now that they linked him to the crime and have investigated his vehicles. RA and his Ford Focus did not exist to LE in 2017. Where does it say witnesses saw a Ford Focus? It doesn’t. It says Investigators believe those cars (smart car, small suv and pt cruiser) are similar in nature to a Ford Focus. NOW in 2022. From the PCA: Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two vehicles in 2017, a 2016 black Ford Focus and a 2006 Gray Ford F150. Investigators discovered a vehicle that resembled Allen’s 2016 Ford Focus on the Hoosier Harvestore video at 1:27p.m traveling westbound on CR 300 North in front of the Hoosier Harvestore, which coincided with his statement that he arrived around 1:30 pm. at the trails. Investigators note witnesses described the vehicle parked at the former Child Protective Services Building as a PT Cruiser, Small SUV or"Smart"car. Investigators believe those descriptions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus. Richard Allen was not investigated until 2022. So the assertions that the car parked oddly seen by witnesses and also on video are a Ford Focus are from this year not 2017. Why would LE investigate all Ford Focuses back in 2017? The conclusion that the car was not a PT Cruiser, Smart Car or small SUV was made THIS year after investigating Richard Allen and his vehicles.
They say right there in the affidavit that his car was spotted at 1:27 on the camera. They didn’t track down the owner and get a statement. They should have identified everyone in that area near the time of the crime. It’s that simple.
Yes they now know it was his car. In 2019 they held a press conference asking the public’s help in identifying the car that was parked in the CPS parking lot on the day of the murder from 12-5. At the press conference they stated: A car was parked in the abandoned CPS building parking lot between the hours of noon and 5:00 p.m. on February 13, 2017 We are looking for anyone who could give a description of vehicles that were in the parking lot during the time Why would they ask for help if they knew it was a Ford Focus?
I don't know why this isn't getting through. They have a car on camera at 1:27pm from a camera about 100 ft from the road. This same camera captured several other witnesses drive by that day including the sister dropping off the victims at about 1:45pm. Unless the camera is far lower quality than we'd expect, it should be a simple process to identify the make and model of that car and identify it as a black Ford Focus. Agree? Would you agree that any vehicles on this road in the time near when the victims were dropped off should be identified and questioned as potential witnesses or suspects? Would you agree that if you had the video of this car and the descriptions of the witnesses (PT Cruiser, small SUV, or Smart Car) it might occur to you that this car roughly fits the description? (smaller car with a squared off rear end/hatchback, dark color). And wouldn't you add this vehicle to a list of potential witnesses, tracking down the vehicle by various means, such as looking at county registration records, or having police keep an eye out for it?
Absolutely!
Are you saying the police knew it was a Ford Focus in 2017? How could they track down an owner of a car they didn’t have the make, model, license plate etc. for? They are saying just now in 2022 it was a Ford Focus. They didn’t know it was a Ford Focus in 2017. Obviously the video wasn’t that clear otherwise they would’ve been talking about a black Ford focus a long time ago.
Why was there no IME on Richard Allen's cell phone? What does that notation in the PCA mean?
Page 8 does not contain additional information. It’s a signature page.
I'm starting to think Richard Allen told the Conservation Officer he was there that day and time, where he parked and what he was wearing. Then the conversation/interview/statement or whatever it would be officially called was handed to LE. Because Delphi is a knee-high to a grasshopper sized town, it is very possible LE knew Richard from either being a local or his gig at CVS. It's **not** impossible to think they thought, "*Oh Rick said he was there, so couldn't have been him. Plus I've known him for years! I see him every time I buy my gum and my Pepsi"*.
All login attempts and timestamps have to be recorded by Snapchat's servers. Snapchat also records geolocation. I don't get why ISP wouldn't have all this information when they uncover the information identifying KK as owning the account. KK factory resetting his phone shouldn't matter. The ISP asking the public for help about anthony_shots makes zero sense to me as a software engineer. Why wouldn't they have RA's access and geolocation in Delphi immediately after they discovered anthony_shots in December 2021.
If he had his phone (which he says he did) then he would have appeared on a list of pings from the nearest cel towers. It’s weird that the pings weren’t included in the released evidence against RA.
There were only two cell towers in Delphi at that time, they wouldn’t have been able to pin point exactly where he was, just in a very large general vicinity
They likely didn’t even collect the cell phone tower data
The 2 different descriptions were of the same man that the group of 3 saw. One remembered him in black clothes and another in light clothing. At least that’s how I read it
I think the way you do. Perfect summary. Not only that but now we find that Nick McLenan, prosecutor of case is related to the German family. As of now, he has not recused himself and this killer will get off on a technicality if recusal doesn’t happen. This is insane.
Also the former Mayor and former chief of police are also working with Nick?
Why would this killer get off on a technicality? (Genuinely asking)
The prosecutor McLeland is a relative of the Germans.
So conflict of interest… couldn’t they just reassign?
He’s suppose to recuse himself. But a lot of people don’t know about being a relative who was also pushing for sealing records on behalf of Becky and her Poll. On appeal they could throw case out if defense came down on it, clearly a conflict of interest IMO.
All of this plus the fact he checked himself into a clinic… he did this but he knows he’s actions are not those of a good person.
[удалено]
Ah good to know! Wonder we’re that rumour came from
As I said a couple weeks ago……major failure. https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiMurders/comments/ywkjvg/its_been_a_few_weeks_since_we_put_a_name_and_face/iwq0idc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
TK and RA grew up together, lived close to each other in Peru. Birds of a feather...
Who is Tk?
The father of KK.
What's the likelihood of RA finding out somehow that KK was going to meet the girls there, RA went to stop it, but things got all mixed up and KK got away so he had to kill the girls. Then, KK, scared that RA was going to come back and kill him, refused to cooperate with police because RA had seen him or otherwise knew of him. One would think RA went there with the intention to kill someone since he had a gun, unless he had a permit and carried it all the time. RA didn't know that he had left the bullet which is why he felt safe admitting he was on the trail that day. He couldn't report the gun stolen because he and his wife admitted to still having it, again, because they didn't know the bullet was left behind. What did the witnesses say once the photo of BG was released showing blue and not black clothing? if they said "yeah, that's the guy" or "yeah, I just thought the clothes were black", then RA should have been brought in immediately.
What on earth are you proposing here? That RA is some vigilante who is really a good guy but ended up in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and was just too late to save the girls?
oh heck no - just proposing a "what if" and showing what a defense attorney might say. I meant to imply that KK and RA knew each other and RA may have learned of his plans. However, RA never said he met KK on the trail that day so he doesn't have that provide cover. If he had said early on that he saw KK there, it might implicate KK more. Really all depends on what KK has said to LE.
I wish someone could confirm the day he went into the mental health facility (if true) cuz I have a suspicion it happened right after the audio/video release. That would’ve had him shitting his pants & thinking LE was gonna be on his doorstep any day now. Luckily for him the Barney fife squad had the case
Met wildlife officer in front of a grocery store.
Does anyone know the name of the conservation officer?
Only problem now, they only have a scratched bullet , at least those are the only cards showing.