The Delphi Murders: The Defense Asks for an Interlocutory Appeal

[00:00:00] [SPEAKER_02]: Playing June's Journey is just like dropping straight into your own cozy mystery story.

[00:00:05] [SPEAKER_01]: Only this time, you get to hone your observational skills. You get to piece together the clues.

[00:00:11] [SPEAKER_01]: You get to be the detective.

[00:00:12] [SPEAKER_02]: June's Journey is a free-to-download hidden object game. You play as June Parker. She's

[00:00:18] [SPEAKER_02]: a flapper slash sleuth and she's all about investigating mysterious goings on in various

[00:00:23] [SPEAKER_02]: jazz age locales. Starting with the murder of her sister and brother-in-law, June sets off

[00:00:29] [SPEAKER_02]: on a global quest to unravel mysteries and right injustices wherever they occur.

[00:00:35] [SPEAKER_01]: Each level sees you picking out hidden objects. The scenes are beautifully illustrated and

[00:00:40] [SPEAKER_01]: the gameplay is fun and relaxing. I usually play in between tasks as sort of a way to

[00:00:46] [SPEAKER_01]: relax and recharge. The sense of accomplishment knocking out a level or two is great. It's

[00:00:52] [SPEAKER_01]: a way to feel like you're escaping reality and traveling back in time to the glamorous

[00:00:58] [SPEAKER_01]: 1920s.

[00:00:58] [SPEAKER_02]: Can you crack the case? Download June's Journey for free today on iOS and Android.

[00:01:05] [SPEAKER_00]: Seeking the truth never gets old, even when it hides in the shadows. Immerse yourself

[00:01:10] [SPEAKER_00]: in the world of June's Journey, a free-to-play hidden object game set in the roaring 20s.

[00:01:16] [SPEAKER_00]: Solve the mystery of the devious gossip spreader and celebrate our seventh anniversary

[00:01:21] [SPEAKER_00]: with exclusive events, never-before-seen decorations, thrilling mysteries, and exciting

[00:01:26] [SPEAKER_00]: giveaways. The adventure and the gossip awaits. Are you ready for the journey? Download

[00:01:32] [SPEAKER_00]: June's Journey today for free on Android or iOS.

[00:01:36] [SPEAKER_01]: Content worrying this episode includes discussion of the murder of two girls.

[00:01:40] [SPEAKER_02]: So there's been yet another filing in the Delphi Murders case. This is a filing from

[00:01:46] [SPEAKER_02]: the defense team led by Andrew Baldwin, Bradley Rosie, and Jennifer Auger. And it

[00:01:52] [SPEAKER_02]: is a motion for court to certify court orders for interlocutory appeal pursuant to Appellate

[00:01:57] [SPEAKER_02]: Rule 14 and request to rule expeditiously on said motion. So this is less a twist

[00:02:04] [SPEAKER_02]: or turn in the Delphi case and more of a very gentle bend in the case that we

[00:02:08] [SPEAKER_02]: all saw coming. So no huge surprise here, but we're going to take a look at this

[00:02:13] [SPEAKER_02]: motion, see what it says, see what the defense is asking for, and discuss some

[00:02:17] [SPEAKER_02]: of the implications for the case.

[00:02:20] [SPEAKER_02]: My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist and I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[00:02:26] [SPEAKER_01]: And this is the murder sheet. We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting,

[00:02:31] [SPEAKER_01]: interviews, and deep dives into murder cases. We're the murder sheet.

[00:02:36] [SPEAKER_02]: And this is the Delphi Murders. The defense asks for an interlocutory appeal.

[00:03:29] [SPEAKER_01]: So this isn't really a big surprise. The defense, as I think we discussed at length when these

[00:03:39] [SPEAKER_01]: hearings were held on these issues, they had a disastrous time at these hearings.

[00:03:44] [SPEAKER_01]: They had to establish a connection between their theories and the crime,

[00:03:51] [SPEAKER_01]: and they completely failed to do so. And their so-called expert witness was a disaster.

[00:03:59] [SPEAKER_01]: And so as an entirely predictable result of that, they lost. They lost virtually

[00:04:06] [SPEAKER_01]: everything. And Judge Goal ruled that all of the confessions that Richard Allen made

[00:04:14] [SPEAKER_01]: would be admitted into the trial. And Judge Goal also ruled that third-party

[00:04:20] [SPEAKER_01]: theories, the oldenism theories, theories about the Klein's theories about

[00:04:25] [SPEAKER_01]: Ron Logan, those could not be brought in because the defense simply hadn't done what they said

[00:04:31] [SPEAKER_01]: they were due and establish a connection between those theories and the crime.

[00:04:36] [SPEAKER_02]: And so- Can I just say one thing?

[00:04:38] [SPEAKER_02]: Please do. I see this a lot. People do wonder,

[00:04:41] [SPEAKER_02]: well, shouldn't they just be allowed to do whatever? I mean, shouldn't they be allowed

[00:04:46] [SPEAKER_02]: to just kind of get in there and randomly point at one of the jury members and say,

[00:04:50] [SPEAKER_02]: maybe they did it? The answer is obviously no. There are rules of evidence at trial.

[00:04:55] [SPEAKER_02]: And in addition to that, Indiana has specific statewide rules of evidence that

[00:05:01] [SPEAKER_02]: are bolstered by case law, things like that. So there are rules.

[00:05:04] [SPEAKER_01]: Think of it this way. Think of it this way. Would you like it if Brad Rosey or Andrew Baldwin

[00:05:12] [SPEAKER_01]: could go into court and say, these murders were actually committed by you? And give you name.

[00:05:20] [SPEAKER_02]: Give your name. Give you name.

[00:05:22] [SPEAKER_01]: Give the listener's name. Would you feel comfortable being accused with no evidence?

[00:05:28] [SPEAKER_01]: I'm guessing not. Would you feel comfortable having someone close to you, having their name

[00:05:33] [SPEAKER_01]: brought up in court, as being the real perpetrator of a crime without evidence?

[00:05:38] [SPEAKER_01]: I'm guessing not. So this is another one of the reasons why there are rules in effect,

[00:05:44] [SPEAKER_01]: because they are to protect the rights of citizens.

[00:05:48] [SPEAKER_02]: Yeah, it's important to note that our system has flaws and it can be clunky, but

[00:05:54] [SPEAKER_02]: most of the way it's set up is typically to prevent issues from happening. So it's well

[00:06:01] [SPEAKER_02]: within the judge's discretion in this situation to deny all third party arguments,

[00:06:06] [SPEAKER_02]: all third party defenses rather. And people cannot like that, but that is completely within

[00:06:14] [SPEAKER_02]: her power and it's not unusual. It's not some...

[00:06:18] [SPEAKER_01]: And that is proper as long as there is no evidence of a connection between those third

[00:06:24] [SPEAKER_02]: parties and the crime. Had they proved some sort of connection

[00:06:27] [SPEAKER_02]: between the odinist and this crime, we would hope and we would imagine that the matter would

[00:06:33] [SPEAKER_02]: be very different. But you can't just take a bunch of vague conjectures and some expert

[00:06:37] [SPEAKER_02]: witness, so-called expert witness who has no business being there and act like that's enough,

[00:06:43] [SPEAKER_02]: because that's like turning in like a couple of pasted together toothpicks on a little

[00:06:50] [SPEAKER_02]: cardboard and saying that's your final science project and you obviously just did it in the

[00:06:54] [SPEAKER_02]: way five minutes before. You need to do a little better than that.

[00:06:59] [SPEAKER_01]: So they're asking to appeal the judge's rulings to another court. It's called an interlocutory

[00:07:05] [SPEAKER_01]: appeal and it is worth noting... First of all, the obvious point is if such an appeal goes

[00:07:11] [SPEAKER_01]: forward then we're not going to have a trial in October. But the decision as to whether

[00:07:17] [SPEAKER_01]: or not the appeal will go forward, at least the first step belongs to Judge Gull. She has

[00:07:23] [SPEAKER_01]: to decide whether or not she wants to certify the appeal. And so this is a document that's

[00:07:28] [SPEAKER_01]: not just asking for the appeal, but is trying to provide Judge Gull with reasons for why

[00:07:37] [SPEAKER_01]: the defense believes that she should let this appeal go to the next step and that

[00:07:42] [SPEAKER_01]: she should certify it. And I would imagine that within a few days, maybe a little

[00:07:50] [SPEAKER_01]: longer, maybe shorter, prosecutor Nick McClellan will very likely file some sort of document

[00:07:56] [SPEAKER_01]: where he gives reasons on guessing for why he doesn't think it should go to an appeal

[00:08:01] [SPEAKER_02]: and why we should just go on your trial. Yeah, this document indicates that Nicholas

[00:08:07] [SPEAKER_02]: McClellan has waived the typical period of time that he has to do this response.

[00:08:13] [SPEAKER_02]: And so we could probably expect it a little bit sooner than we normally would.

[00:08:16] [SPEAKER_02]: So that's something to look out for, for sure.

[00:08:22] [SPEAKER_01]: So the document begins by saying, yeah, we want to have this interlocutory appeal.

[00:08:28] [SPEAKER_01]: And in support of said motion, Allen states the following. We're not going to read this

[00:08:34] [SPEAKER_01]: entire document. But in the first few paragraphs, basically they're saying that orders

[00:08:43] [SPEAKER_01]: in limine have historically been eligible to be reviewed by higher courts. And that's what

[00:08:51] [SPEAKER_01]: this was. These were orders in limine by Judge Gull. Also in the past, motions in limine,

[00:09:00] [SPEAKER_01]: interlocutory appeals for these motions have been allowed to the benefit of the prosecution.

[00:09:06] [SPEAKER_01]: The dials of motions to suppress are also eligible for interlocutory appeal.

[00:09:11] [SPEAKER_01]: So they're basically saying, we don't think it's unusual for people to make requests like this

[00:09:20] [SPEAKER_01]: for it to be reviewed by a higher court. Is that fair to say?

[00:09:24] [SPEAKER_01]: I think it's fair to say. Yeah.

[00:09:26] [SPEAKER_01]: Yeah. And again, one reason why I'm not surprised by this is by them taking this step,

[00:09:34] [SPEAKER_01]: it seems like the common sense approach for them to take at this point. Because say what

[00:09:39] [SPEAKER_01]: will about the merits of the Odinism theory, they've invested a lot of time and effort into it.

[00:09:48] [SPEAKER_01]: And right now the trial is just a little bit more than a month away.

[00:09:52] [SPEAKER_01]: And so if they no longer can use this theory they've devoted so much time on,

[00:09:58] [SPEAKER_02]: who knows what they're going to do? Let me break down my sort of mixed feelings

[00:10:03] [SPEAKER_02]: about this. And I'm speaking obviously not as attorney because I'm not one,

[00:10:07] [SPEAKER_02]: but as a journalist just observing this. I don't blame the defense for filing an

[00:10:11] [SPEAKER_02]: interlocutory appeal on this. It makes sense what you're saying. This is what they had.

[00:10:16] [SPEAKER_02]: It was all roundly rejected. Not only that, but even sort of side issues that they were

[00:10:22] [SPEAKER_02]: sort of hinting at like Hegenkline and Ron Logan were thrown out. So it makes sense that

[00:10:27] [SPEAKER_02]: they would go forward trying to salvage some of that. Here's where I do have a problem.

[00:10:31] [SPEAKER_02]: I feel like this Odinism theory was the way they've handled this was like the time I put a bunch of

[00:10:39] [SPEAKER_02]: heavy groceries in college at the Food Lion in a thin plastic bag and then walked back to my

[00:10:47] [SPEAKER_02]: dorms swinging it wildly. I probably should not have been surprised when the bottom of that bag

[00:10:53] [SPEAKER_02]: ripped open and all my stuff fell all over the sidewalk. This should have been evident to

[00:10:59] [SPEAKER_02]: any dare I say like thinking person that there were a lot of problems with this theory.

[00:11:05] [SPEAKER_02]: And listen, members of the public saw that. We saw that. Members of the media saw that.

[00:11:11] [SPEAKER_02]: These men have access to heaps and heaps of discovery. They should have seen it too.

[00:11:17] [SPEAKER_02]: And the fact that they charged forward with this thing and acted like it was the greatest

[00:11:21] [SPEAKER_02]: invention since sliced bread is baffling. I don't understand why they put all their

[00:11:28] [SPEAKER_02]: eggs in this very poorly made basket. So I don't necessarily fault the defense of this

[00:11:37] [SPEAKER_02]: moment for doing this, but the fact that this could very well lead to more delays

[00:11:42] [SPEAKER_02]: is still on them because they still made that choice and continue to make that choice every day

[00:11:48] [SPEAKER_02]: that they woke up and said let's do this Odinism thing. Hey, are we able to expand upon

[00:11:52] [SPEAKER_02]: the work that Todd Click and Kevin Murphy did when they were investigating it?

[00:11:56] [SPEAKER_02]: No. Do we have any real experts able to come in and talk to this?

[00:12:01] [SPEAKER_02]: No. Well, let's keep going. That's fine. It's like the dog on fire meme. This is fine.

[00:12:08] [SPEAKER_02]: This is fine. I don't see how they could have. How did we get here?

[00:12:13] [SPEAKER_02]: How does something like this even happen? Let's just move on.

[00:12:16] [SPEAKER_02]: Are you searching for a cleaning solution that's both incredibly powerful and all

[00:12:22] [SPEAKER_02]: natural and safe for your family? Well, we'd strongly recommend Ultralux Clean.

[00:12:28] [SPEAKER_02]: Ultralux Clean is a powerful, safe, and effective cleaning solution that relies on

[00:12:33] [SPEAKER_01]: hypochlorous acid. Murder sheet listeners can get this at a terrific price, 20% off. Plus,

[00:12:40] [SPEAKER_01]: you can use this coupon up to three times per person. Hypochlorous acid is what you get when

[00:12:46] [SPEAKER_02]: you combine water, salt, and citric acid and send that mixture through electrolysis.

[00:12:52] [SPEAKER_02]: It's FDA approved. Ultralux Clean combines power and safety. Hypochlorous acid is a

[00:12:58] [SPEAKER_02]: hospital-grade cleaner, but you can use Ultralux Clean on all kinds of surfaces,

[00:13:03] [SPEAKER_02]: kitchen countertops, tables, toys. It's even safe on your skin. Ensure your house is a

[00:13:10] [SPEAKER_01]: safe place for you and your family. Opt for Ultralux Clean and get the strongest all-natural

[00:13:16] [SPEAKER_02]: cleaner and disinfectant out there. Ultralux also has plenty of other really cool products

[00:13:20] [SPEAKER_02]: you should check out. Their Red Mini device offers accessible red light therapy, which

[00:13:25] [SPEAKER_02]: studies indicate can help reduce inflammation and pain. Plus, they've got these great hydrogen

[00:13:30] [SPEAKER_02]: water tablets that offer a hydrogen concentration of 12 parts per million and take only about two

[00:13:36] [SPEAKER_02]: to three minutes to dissolve in water. As they say, the best day to improve your health is today.

[00:13:41] [SPEAKER_02]: So head over to UltraluxHealth.com and use M-Sheet to get 20% off when you order the Red Mini,

[00:13:47] [SPEAKER_02]: Ultralux Clean, or hydrogen tablets. That's UltraluxHealth.com and M-Sheet for 20% off.

[00:13:56] [SPEAKER_01]: The first few paragraphs of this document, they try to make arguments convincingly or not

[00:14:03] [SPEAKER_01]: they believe that Richard Allen's constitutional rights are at stake and will be at stake and

[00:14:10] [SPEAKER_01]: possibly violated if this motion for an interlocutory appeal is not granted.

[00:14:19] [SPEAKER_01]: I want to skip though, let's go down to paragraph seven. Can you go down to paragraph

[00:14:27] [SPEAKER_01]: seven? Yeah, I'm going. Can you read paragraph seven and then seven and then A underneath it?

[00:14:34] [SPEAKER_02]: Okay sure. Quote, if this court has erred and the determination of the error is withheld until

[00:14:39] [SPEAKER_02]: after judgment, then the appellant, victims' families, and citizens of Carroll County will

[00:14:44] [SPEAKER_02]: suffer substantial expense and damage as follows. A, Richard Allen will suffer continued

[00:14:50] [SPEAKER_02]: incarceration while awaiting the ruling from the Court of Appeals. Okay, so end quote.

[00:14:55] [SPEAKER_01]: So let's talk about this. So this interlocutory appeal, if it happens, basically would have the

[00:15:02] [SPEAKER_01]: equivalent of pushing a giant pause button on the trial while this issue is taken up for

[00:15:09] [SPEAKER_01]: appeal and then once the appeal, if it is granted, and the court rules on it, once that

[00:15:15] [SPEAKER_01]: happens in the trial will start up again. So they're trying to say this is the way to cause

[00:15:22] [SPEAKER_01]: less damage because if we go forward and then later on, if we have a trial now and then find

[00:15:32] [SPEAKER_01]: out that the judge made a mistake, well that's going to be bad for the people of Carroll County

[00:15:37] [SPEAKER_01]: and they said well, by gum is going to be bad for Richard Allen because he will continue

[00:15:41] [SPEAKER_01]: to be incarcerated while he has to await the post-trial ruling from the Court of Appeals.

[00:15:48] [SPEAKER_01]: Can you read B? Because this is another thing that they say will cause damage

[00:15:52] [SPEAKER_02]: quote B. If Richard Allen is convicted without interlocutory appeal, then he as well as the

[00:15:58] [SPEAKER_02]: families of the victims would first suffer through the anticipation of a ruling from

[00:16:01] [SPEAKER_02]: the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court on these critical issues and then whether a reversal will

[00:16:06] [SPEAKER_02]: result in a second lengthy trial. If the appeal in regular course not interlocutory results

[00:16:12] [SPEAKER_02]: in a reversal, then Richard Allen and the victim's families will have to endure a second

[00:16:16] [SPEAKER_01]: lengthy trial end quote. Okay, so they're saying let's say we don't have an interlocutory appeal,

[00:16:23] [SPEAKER_01]: he is convicted and then later on there is an appeal and the courts look at this issue and

[00:16:29] [SPEAKER_01]: say well by gum the judge was wrong, we need to have a new trial because there was a mistake

[00:16:36] [SPEAKER_01]: made on this issue. They say then we have to go through a second trial for nothing and that

[00:16:44] [SPEAKER_01]: will be bad for everybody. I think certainly we can agree a second trial would be bad.

[00:16:50] [SPEAKER_01]: Yeah. I'm not sure that that would be the result here but that's the claim and certainly

[00:16:58] [SPEAKER_01]: in theory a second trial would be bad. That's true. And again, I'm not sure that is what

[00:17:03] [SPEAKER_01]: the consequence of failure to have interlocutory appeal would be. I frankly don't know that it

[00:17:10] [SPEAKER_01]: would be either but that's what they're saying. Point C is basically a continuation of that

[00:17:19] [SPEAKER_01]: because they say oh if there's a second trial, that means you'd have to sequester a jury a

[00:17:23] [SPEAKER_01]: second time and that's expensive. Attorneys fees the second time around, that would be

[00:17:30] [SPEAKER_01]: expensive too. So they're really hammering the idea that I think all of us are going to

[00:17:36] [SPEAKER_01]: cost you even more money. A second trial would be bad, I'm not sure a second trial would be

[00:17:42] [SPEAKER_02]: the result here. Do you want to read point D? Absolutely. So D. Quote. D. Moreover,

[00:17:50] [SPEAKER_02]: the prosecution of defendant Allen has brought about worldwide attention in nearly every form

[00:17:55] [SPEAKER_02]: of media coverage as well as extensive coverage by various social media platforms. The disclosure

[00:18:00] [SPEAKER_02]: of facts and information including many facts unknown to the public even to this day at a

[00:18:06] [SPEAKER_02]: jury trial will result in the consumption of this information by these reporting sources.

[00:18:11] [SPEAKER_02]: The dissemination of this information to the public which will undoubtedly occur

[00:18:15] [SPEAKER_02]: will make it more difficult for defendant Allen to find an unbiased jurors in the event

[00:18:19] [SPEAKER_01]: of a retrial. End quote. We were talking about this before we started recording,

[00:18:23] [SPEAKER_02]: you had a comment about that paragraph. I mean I think I know what they meant.

[00:18:29] [SPEAKER_02]: So I don't want to say I don't think this is what they're saying. I just was kind of

[00:18:33] [SPEAKER_02]: when I first read that it was almost like wow so you're saying that people aren't going to be

[00:18:38] [SPEAKER_02]: able to look at Allen the same way when we know everything. Like it almost sounded like

[00:18:42] [SPEAKER_02]: then they're going to really think he did it. I think what they're saying here though

[00:18:46] [SPEAKER_02]: is not that. I think what they're actually saying here is that once everyone gets all

[00:18:52] [SPEAKER_02]: this information maybe they'll make up their mind either way and it'll be really hard to

[00:18:56] [SPEAKER_02]: find a jury which I understand and I disagree with actually. And here's why.

[00:19:01] [SPEAKER_02]: Here's why. Not as many people care about true crime or follow this stuff as you would think.

[00:19:07] [SPEAKER_02]: We constantly meet people who don't care about it. I mean they don't like murder. They're not

[00:19:12] [SPEAKER_02]: like oh it doesn't matter that people were murdered but they're like that's not something

[00:19:15] [SPEAKER_02]: that they're going to be particularly interested in. I think it's always going to be possible

[00:19:19] [SPEAKER_02]: to find a jury. Now I think you might have jurors who've heard the case in some capacity

[00:19:24] [SPEAKER_02]: I don't think you're necessarily going to. It's not impossible to find people who have not made

[00:19:30] [SPEAKER_02]: up their mind. You have to understand that Kevin and I and all of you by dint of listening

[00:19:34] [SPEAKER_02]: to this we're in a bit of a bubble because we care about this stuff but not everyone does.

[00:19:38] [SPEAKER_02]: And so I think it would make it harder but I don't think it would make it impossible.

[00:19:43] [SPEAKER_01]: And I want to make another point here they're saying basically oh the spread of

[00:19:49] [SPEAKER_01]: information could possibly taint a potential juror pool you know especially I guess many facts

[00:19:57] [SPEAKER_01]: unknown to the public even to this day. And I really feel like we can't let that go by

[00:20:04] [SPEAKER_01]: without making a comment that one of the sides of this case has worked with YouTubers

[00:20:14] [SPEAKER_01]: in order to disseminate information including information heretofore unknown. We've reported

[00:20:21] [SPEAKER_01]: on this we've reported on defense investigator Matt Hoffman and how closely he worked with

[00:20:26] [SPEAKER_01]: certain YouTubers. A close friend of Andrew Baldwin's leaked crime scene photos certainly

[00:20:34] [SPEAKER_01]: the information in those crime scene photos was up at that point unknown to the public.

[00:20:40] [SPEAKER_01]: So it's just interesting I don't really have anything to say about that prosecution really

[00:20:46] [SPEAKER_01]: hasn't leaked anything the defense has leaked a lot and if putting information out there taints

[00:20:52] [SPEAKER_01]: a jury pool they've tried very hard to do that. Well it really raises some interesting

[00:20:56] [SPEAKER_02]: questions Kevin that kind of ties back to my point because it's like what don't we know

[00:21:00] [SPEAKER_02]: about now? I mean we certainly don't know about where this guy was that day that's not

[00:21:03] [SPEAKER_02]: really come out and we certainly don't know much about Richard Allen. This defense team

[00:21:07] [SPEAKER_02]: has basically strained in order to talk about literally anything else other than the guy that

[00:21:12] [SPEAKER_02]: they're representing. So what you're pointing out is a very good thing they seem to be

[00:21:16] [SPEAKER_02]: absolutely just head over heels for all this social media attention when it benefits them

[00:21:21] [SPEAKER_02]: and when they can feed out leaks to you know dubious sources but at trial that will be

[00:21:29] [SPEAKER_02]: somewhat out of their control and they seem to regard that as a threat. I'm just going to

[00:21:34] [SPEAKER_01]: read the first sentence of point E quote defendant Allen's detention circumstances

[00:21:43] [SPEAKER_01]: are unlike any other pre-trial detainee perhaps in the history of the state end quote unlike any

[00:21:52] [SPEAKER_01]: other pre-trial detainee perhaps in the history of the state I just want to say the word perhaps

[00:21:58] [SPEAKER_01]: there is doing a lot because Anya and I are not super intensive scholars who've looked at every

[00:22:10] [SPEAKER_01]: other case in the history of the state of Indiana but without too much trouble we found

[00:22:17] [SPEAKER_01]: other examples of pre-trial detainees having to be in the department of correction for one reason

[00:22:23] [SPEAKER_02]: or another that was literally discussed at the three day hearing they said there's like

[00:22:27] [SPEAKER_02]: there's been over I mean there's been they actually threw out a number that I don't remember so I'm

[00:22:31] [SPEAKER_02]: not going to guess but they threw out a number there's been this many that we found

[00:22:36] [SPEAKER_02]: so this is not I mean I don't know like they're keep they keep hammering this and and what

[00:22:44] [SPEAKER_02]: would be actually effective to say is his circumstances are highly unusual that's fair to

[00:22:49] [SPEAKER_02]: say that's fair that's good that's good to say say that why why always exaggerate why

[00:22:55] [SPEAKER_02]: always stretch because it's not convincing anymore people are seeing through this increasingly

[00:23:02] [SPEAKER_02]: and it's better to just be honest maybe use a little bit of heightened language but you don't

[00:23:07] [SPEAKER_01]: need to just BS everybody I'm sorry and I'd like to make uh what what may be an obvious

[00:23:12] [SPEAKER_01]: point but that's never stopped me before Delphi Indiana is a wonderful community I

[00:23:19] [SPEAKER_01]: can't say enough about how great that community is their jail though is not like

[00:23:27] [SPEAKER_01]: Alcatraz it is not a super secure jail maybe because they don't have a lot of crime in the

[00:23:33] [SPEAKER_02]: county I don't know I think they have crime but it's just they're a small county they're

[00:23:36] [SPEAKER_02]: a rural county you need resources and a lot of money to refurbish your jail to keep up with

[00:23:43] [SPEAKER_01]: the that's not happened at this point I don't think that they could have kept Richard Allen

[00:23:51] [SPEAKER_01]: safe in that jail for two years I don't think so either I think if Richard Allen had been

[00:23:58] [SPEAKER_01]: in that jail for the last two years he would have been dead now that is what I

[00:24:04] [SPEAKER_02]: did or having been severely attacked by another inmate or have having harmed himself yes

[00:24:10] [SPEAKER_01]: absolutely yes so that is why he was placed elsewhere he's what they call a safe keeper

[00:24:18] [SPEAKER_02]: this is being done for his own protection other inmates attack notorious inmates in order to get

[00:24:24] [SPEAKER_02]: you know for any number of reason in addition to that inmates in jails and prisons are

[00:24:31] [SPEAKER_02]: infamous or maybe not infamous are very widely known to hate people who are accused of or

[00:24:37] [SPEAKER_02]: convicted of crimes against children Richard Allen would be in a lot of danger from other inmates

[00:24:44] [SPEAKER_02]: and from as we've learned himself in any jail that would not be suited to sort of monitor him

[00:24:52] [SPEAKER_02]: closely and keep him away from other inmates that's just a fact so that's why he was put

[00:24:58] [SPEAKER_01]: in the department of correction that's why it was done and when when they when they basically

[00:25:05] [SPEAKER_02]: when Brad Rosie got up and said essentially listen no one has a problem with him moving to

[00:25:09] [SPEAKER_02]: Cass County that worked and he was moved to Cass County when they go with all these

[00:25:13] [SPEAKER_02]: over exaggerations and they start saying oh my gosh it's a whole conspiracy and he's having

[00:25:17] [SPEAKER_02]: the worst time out of anyone in Westville prison and then you find out that they're giving him

[00:25:22] [SPEAKER_02]: iPads even though he's breaking them or you know iPads or whatever tablets you know it's

[00:25:26] [SPEAKER_02]: like okay well you're kind of like losing the point by exaggeration and it's not really

[00:25:33] [SPEAKER_01]: effective lawyering then there's a couple more paragraphs again basically pertaining to the

[00:25:40] [SPEAKER_01]: argument that by golly wouldn't having a second trial be a bad thing and yeah it'd be a bad

[00:25:48] [SPEAKER_01]: thing to have a second trial we've said that before and I will say again that I don't

[00:25:52] [SPEAKER_01]: necessarily feel that not granting this interlocutory appeal would lead to the necessity

[00:25:59] [SPEAKER_01]: for a second trial why don't you read point eight quote this court's august 28 2024 order

[00:26:11] [SPEAKER_02]: and september 4th 2024 order both involve substantial questions of law and the early

[00:26:17] [SPEAKER_02]: determination of those issues will promote a more orderly disposition of the case to wit

[00:26:21] [SPEAKER_02]: september 4th 2024 order denies Richard Allen the ability to present a defense violating both

[00:26:27] [SPEAKER_02]: state and federal constitutions end quote okay that's pretty self-evident and that was point

[00:26:35] [SPEAKER_02]: h oh i'm sorry i joined i jumped ahead to point eight i think you said eight

[00:26:41] [SPEAKER_02]: you're like what are you talking about okay i'll i'll it's fine we'll just leave it in

[00:26:45] [SPEAKER_02]: sorry we're kind of doing this on the fly let's go to age i need to confuse me everybody

[00:26:49] [SPEAKER_02]: kevin's like what quote additionally should this court not allow these issues to be heard by

[00:26:56] [SPEAKER_02]: the court of appeals in an interlocutory fashion then during the jury trial set to begin october

[00:27:01] [SPEAKER_02]: 14th 2024 the jury will be sitting for hours or perhaps even days while the defense presents

[00:27:07] [SPEAKER_02]: its evidence in offer of proof whereas the should the court of appeals find that the trial

[00:27:12] [SPEAKER_02]: court was an error then the jury would not be forced to wait outside the courtroom or in their

[00:27:17] [SPEAKER_02]: hotel rooms for hours or even days while the defense presents its offer of proof the

[00:27:25] [SPEAKER_02]: court of appeals should be able to present a defense violation

[00:27:27] [SPEAKER_01]: before any trial takes place end quote and i thought that was interesting because i

[00:27:31] [SPEAKER_01]: i know what they're trying to say but to me this reminds me of the old movies where

[00:27:37] [SPEAKER_02]: somebody's running a protection racket yeah it'd be a shame if anything annoyed that jury of

[00:27:41] [SPEAKER_01]: yours yeah it'd be a shame if we don't get what we want uh yeah we have to really annoy

[00:27:45] [SPEAKER_01]: bore that journey jury of yours wouldn't that be awful but also i i want to note that making

[00:27:53] [SPEAKER_01]: that argument to a judge is kind of odd because it's not like judge gull has two choices it's not

[00:28:00] [SPEAKER_01]: like she either has to grant an interlocutory appeal or she has to grant the defense an

[00:28:08] [SPEAKER_01]: infinite amount of time to make offers of proof she's able to set limits on that i'm

[00:28:14] [SPEAKER_01]: sure you remember ania at the contempt hearing the defense made some offers of proof and at some

[00:28:19] [SPEAKER_01]: point uh the prosecution said wait a minute this is going on too long and and judge gull had them

[00:28:26] [SPEAKER_01]: be more efficient in their offer of proof so even if the interlocutory appeal is not granted

[00:28:33] [SPEAKER_01]: judge gull is not bound to let them spend hours or days or whatever they envision

[00:28:41] [SPEAKER_01]: just droning on and on and on about this stuff and i also want to note that

[00:28:48] [SPEAKER_01]: we were at this three-day hearing i keep repeating this this was their moment to shine

[00:28:53] [SPEAKER_01]: this was their moment to present all of their great evidence tying oldness to the crime

[00:28:59] [SPEAKER_01]: and they had nothing so what on earth could they present at a trial for weeks and weeks

[00:29:05] [SPEAKER_01]: when they totally blew their chance to present any meaningful evidence at the three-day

[00:29:09] [SPEAKER_02]: hearings yeah i mean i think the goal here is to annoy the jury so then it punishes the

[00:29:14] [SPEAKER_02]: prosecution we've seen situations like the trial in the oj simpson case dragged on for a year

[00:29:19] [SPEAKER_02]: ultimately the jury was not happy with the prosecution in that but i think that could really

[00:29:24] [SPEAKER_02]: readily backfire because if the jury sees the defense just dragging their feet and wasting

[00:29:28] [SPEAKER_02]: time and being foolish that could end up not looking very good for them in this situation so

[00:29:34] [SPEAKER_02]: annoying the annoy the jury at your own risk i would say the jury is not necessarily like

[00:29:40] [SPEAKER_01]: completely ignoring about who's to blame in that situation exactly and then the document goes on and

[00:29:49] [SPEAKER_01]: there is a very lengthy recap of the first frank's memorandum which of course they have

[00:29:57] [SPEAKER_01]: subsequently recapped in many other filings they keep on making this argument you know like

[00:30:02] [SPEAKER_02]: you read nancy drew books as a kid or like the hardy boys and like they you know not that those

[00:30:07] [SPEAKER_02]: are bad examples like it more like the three investigators they always kind of explain hey

[00:30:11] [SPEAKER_02]: there are these three investigators and they work with alfred hitchcock the director and

[00:30:15] [SPEAKER_02]: you know this is kind of their backstory it's like one of those things i feel with with

[00:30:19] [SPEAKER_02]: the frank's memorandum because it always just goes in to everything and i don't understand why

[00:30:25] [SPEAKER_02]: i don't feel like they're particularly strong arguments but they keep making them and at

[00:30:31] [SPEAKER_01]: this point after sitting through those hearings at which point they were supposed to offer proof

[00:30:40] [SPEAKER_01]: establishing any sort of a connection here and they failed to do so it this point i become a

[00:30:48] [SPEAKER_01]: little uncomfortable going on the podcast and repeating what are frankly baseless accusations

[00:30:57] [SPEAKER_01]: against these men they name who had nothing to do with these murders yeah and i just would

[00:31:04] [SPEAKER_01]: feel uncomfortable going through and recapping this because i think one thing that was pretty

[00:31:09] [SPEAKER_01]: well established at these hearings is that these men that they have been accusing of

[00:31:13] [SPEAKER_01]: murder for over a year now had nothing to do with that crime i mean is there like it just

[00:31:18] [SPEAKER_02]: can i just like when you think about that over a year throwing these guys's names out there

[00:31:23] [SPEAKER_02]: dragging them through this and behaving as if they're the real murder suspects and ensuring

[00:31:29] [SPEAKER_02]: that every every brief is a press release that they can proclaim this are there ethical issues

[00:31:34] [SPEAKER_02]: there because like that is pretty odious when you spell it out that way what they have done

[00:31:39] [SPEAKER_01]: to these people i mean for the rest of the lives of these men i would imagine if someone

[00:31:46] [SPEAKER_01]: were to google their names some of these accusations would come up and can you imagine

[00:31:51] [SPEAKER_01]: applying for a job and having someone google your name and find out that

[00:31:56] [SPEAKER_02]: andrew baldwin once accused you of murder but like but it's these attorneys these defense

[00:32:01] [SPEAKER_02]: attorneys knew that what they had was incredibly weak and that they had nothing they added

[00:32:07] [SPEAKER_02]: nothing to the sort of murphy ferancy click base that they were building off of at like

[00:32:14] [SPEAKER_02]: at what point is this just sort of a horrible thing to do to somebody that like

[00:32:19] [SPEAKER_02]: i mean i know that defense attorneys certainly have a lot of leeway as they should they need to

[00:32:24] [SPEAKER_02]: be able to perform a vigorous defense of their client and i i certainly that that's how it

[00:32:30] [SPEAKER_02]: should be but at what point does this just look like needless harm inflicted on others

[00:32:37] [SPEAKER_02]: based on nothing basically a sale in witch trials you know these people they have creepy

[00:32:43] [SPEAKER_02]: online presidences or i you know they came up in some way or you know one of them is

[00:32:48] [SPEAKER_02]: mentally impaired and he said some stuff you know maybe they did it but we don't really have

[00:32:53] [SPEAKER_02]: anything but you know whatever i mean it just i don't know it seems wrong i don't know

[00:32:58] [SPEAKER_01]: yeah i'm still taking no public position on the innocence or guilt of richard allen but

[00:33:04] [SPEAKER_01]: i will say i don't believe these men that the defense team have named have anything to do

[00:33:10] [SPEAKER_01]: with this crime and i i admit that these men they have named i don't necessarily think

[00:33:16] [SPEAKER_01]: they're angels they don't have to i don't necessarily think i might go out and have

[00:33:19] [SPEAKER_01]: tea with them i don't think they'd want to have tea with me but i don't believe they had anything

[00:33:23] [SPEAKER_02]: to do with these murders yeah i i think i'm in that position too at this point

[00:33:28] [SPEAKER_02]: and can i just say throughout this throughout this is such a nitpick but throughout this

[00:33:33] [SPEAKER_02]: whole document they keep saying paganist norse paganist a paganist whatever there's a word

[00:33:39] [SPEAKER_02]: it's pagan okay just come on what are we doing here why must we add i or ist to

[00:33:44] [SPEAKER_02]: everything in order to sound more official just say norse pagan sorry we can go back on with this

[00:33:52] [SPEAKER_01]: i just that bothered me so there is one line in or rather one sentence fragment from paragraph

[00:33:59] [SPEAKER_01]: 11 i want to read and i'm going to read that very quickly and that is quote because richard

[00:34:05] [SPEAKER_01]: allen has no ties to norse paganism in quotes so just put a pin in that i believe

[00:34:10] [SPEAKER_01]: you wanted to say something about they mentioned don pearlmutter in this paragraph yeah i'll read

[00:34:16] [SPEAKER_02]: i'll read that aspect of it here on august quote on august 1st 2024 the defense presented

[00:34:23] [SPEAKER_02]: evidence through expert witness don pearlmutter that the crime scene was a textbook ritualistic

[00:34:28] [SPEAKER_02]: killing this opinion was offered from an expert who literally wrote the book on analyzing a crime

[00:34:34] [SPEAKER_02]: scene for a ritualistic murder and has also taught fbi and other law enforcement agencies

[00:34:39] [SPEAKER_02]: all over the countries what a ritualistic crime scene looks like furthermore dr pearlmutter has

[00:34:44] [SPEAKER_02]: almost exclusively worked for law enforcement and prosecution not the defense the jury would

[00:34:48] [SPEAKER_02]: be able to assess the weight to give dr pearlmutter's assessment of the crime scene end

[00:34:53] [SPEAKER_02]: quote a couple of things first of all dr pearlmutter you know ripped apart the fbi

[00:35:00] [SPEAKER_02]: bau because they use sort quote unquote rational western techniques in order to analyze

[00:35:06] [SPEAKER_02]: i.e psychologically profiling killers rather than her novel technique of looking for symbols

[00:35:15] [SPEAKER_02]: that bolster her clients claims so that's one thing secondly it's interesting that they say

[00:35:22] [SPEAKER_02]: she's worked extensively for law enforcement and prosecution i think in every each one of those

[00:35:28] [SPEAKER_02]: cases that she's worked on whatever the claims of that side are should be put under intense

[00:35:33] [SPEAKER_02]: scrutiny at this point yes because this is nonsense and if law enforcement or prosecution

[00:35:38] [SPEAKER_02]: is relying on her for anything then that's wrong and they shouldn't be you this this this was a

[00:35:45] [SPEAKER_02]: disaster the fact that they're not too embarrassed to you know she wrote a book you know anyone can

[00:35:52] [SPEAKER_02]: write a book okay anyone can publish whatever they want the question is do they have any

[00:35:56] [SPEAKER_02]: credibility have they worked on cases that are similar have they gone on court tv and publicly

[00:36:02] [SPEAKER_02]: thrown their hat in on one side and criticized the other side and talked about how it must be

[00:36:08] [SPEAKER_02]: ritual killing and then they happened to just stick to that when they were actually called

[00:36:11] [SPEAKER_02]: into this thing you know those are the questions and the fact that they weren't too

[00:36:16] [SPEAKER_02]: embarrassed to bring her back out after nicholas mclellan completely destroyed her on cross

[00:36:22] [SPEAKER_02]: examination just says everything because we were there and perhaps you know i mean people have

[00:36:27] [SPEAKER_02]: the transcripts of this have come out since and i think people maybe who thought we were being

[00:36:33] [SPEAKER_02]: too hard on her have over time been looking at that and reaching out to us and saying actually

[00:36:38] [SPEAKER_02]: you were right i thought you were just being jerks but that was really bad and you know what

[00:36:42] [SPEAKER_02]: yes you know i'm not just trying to be mean or anything but this was this was an

[00:36:48] [SPEAKER_02]: infuriatingly embarrassing witness to watch and she had no business being in that courtroom

[00:36:54] [SPEAKER_02]: and frankly they have no business citing her for anything at this point i mean her credibility was

[00:37:00] [SPEAKER_01]: in shreds so that's all i wanted to say okay i am going to read paragraph 13 quote

[00:37:07] [SPEAKER_01]: furthermore the prosecution requested the court to prevent the defense from presenting evidence

[00:37:12] [SPEAKER_01]: that third party suspects keegan klein and tony klein committed the murders even though credible

[00:37:19] [SPEAKER_01]: evidence existed that a keegan klein had arranged to meet one of the victims on the

[00:37:23] [SPEAKER_01]: of the murders b keegan klein implicated his father tony klein is being involved in the murders

[00:37:30] [SPEAKER_01]: c law enforcement tried to tie richard allen to tony klein and arguably only interrogated

[00:37:37] [SPEAKER_01]: richard allen because of law enforcement's initial belief that tony klein and richard alan

[00:37:42] [SPEAKER_01]: knew each other and committed the crimes together d law enforcement officials discovered a cache of

[00:37:49] [SPEAKER_01]: child pornography on keegan klein's personal cell phone during the course of their investigation

[00:37:53] [SPEAKER_01]: and e law enforcement officials actually transported keegan klein to an area near the crime scene to

[00:37:59] [SPEAKER_01]: corroborate his aversion of what he and his father tony did near the crime scene on the day

[00:38:04] [SPEAKER_01]: in question in quote there's a number of things probably that we should talk about about this

[00:38:09] [SPEAKER_01]: paragraph but i want to say the thing that jumped out to me to use the old cliche from

[00:38:16] [SPEAKER_01]: sherlock holmes is the dog that didn't bark because you will remember a few moments ago

[00:38:22] [SPEAKER_01]: when we were talking about odinism i read you a phrase from their filing in which they

[00:38:29] [SPEAKER_01]: explicitly said that richard allen was not an odinist in that paragraph i just read

[00:38:36] [SPEAKER_01]: they never explicitly say that richard allen does not know the clines weird and so that

[00:38:45] [SPEAKER_01]: that makes me that's the dog that didn't bark that makes me speculate a bit and i will say

[00:38:50] [SPEAKER_01]: this paragraph officially has me wondering oh is that official now that is official i've

[00:38:57] [SPEAKER_02]: certified it you've certified it well i'll just say this in addition to that i think that's a

[00:39:02] [SPEAKER_02]: really good observation in addition to that i think it's really interesting but despite all

[00:39:07] [SPEAKER_02]: this they put so many eggs in the odinism basket so there must be something about this

[00:39:13] [SPEAKER_02]: theory that maybe didn't engender a full-on commitment said they treated it very casually

[00:39:18] [SPEAKER_02]: essentially throwing it in as a last effort to save their main theory which is odinism

[00:39:23] [SPEAKER_01]: and of course in fairness during the hearings that we attended detective veto the united state

[00:39:29] [SPEAKER_01]: police did testify that investigators tried very hard to establish a solid connection

[00:39:38] [SPEAKER_01]: between richard allen and the clines and were unable to do so i think another thing

[00:39:43] [SPEAKER_01]: i want to highlight is they say quote law enforcement tried to tie richard allen to

[00:39:50] [SPEAKER_01]: tony klein and arguably only interrogated richard allen because of law enforcement's

[00:39:55] [SPEAKER_01]: initial belief that tony klein and richard allen knew each other and committed the crimes

[00:39:59] [SPEAKER_01]: together arguably arguably is doing a lot in that sentence i think that you know richard

[00:40:05] [SPEAKER_01]: allen put himself at the crime scene so i think there were other reasons i came on their

[00:40:10] [SPEAKER_02]: radar i think it's i think it's certainly from what detective dave veto said on the

[00:40:14] [SPEAKER_02]: stand it's certainly obvious that uh they were definitely looking at allen through a

[00:40:19] [SPEAKER_02]: lens of klein at first where they're saying is there any connection there but that being said

[00:40:26] [SPEAKER_02]: this lead this allen lead came up because there was some sort of misplaced tip that

[00:40:32] [SPEAKER_02]: was then rediscovered and allen came back on the radar allen was looked at allen was

[00:40:40] [SPEAKER_02]: in a position where he was putting himself at the crime scene and things went from there

[00:40:44] [SPEAKER_02]: tony klein and keegan klein did not give allen's name to law enforcement let me just say that

[00:40:50] [SPEAKER_02]: really clearly because i know people who follow this online they're gonna look at that and

[00:40:55] [SPEAKER_02]: they're gonna say oh it's all confirmed no that's not how it went down what i just said

[00:41:00] [SPEAKER_02]: is how it went down so i just want to state that emphatically because let's not let's not

[00:41:07] [SPEAKER_02]: like look at the creative writing at some of this stuff and just let our state get carried away

[00:41:13] [SPEAKER_02]: because that's not helpful do you want to talk about ron logan at all no i don't because he was

[00:41:19] [SPEAKER_02]: such a non-entity from the defense's perspective that they barely gave him any time the discussion

[00:41:26] [SPEAKER_02]: of ron logan at this three-day hearing was a real afterthought of a presentation by

[00:41:30] [SPEAKER_02]: jennifer oje that just sounded like uh yeah ron logan he's a guy anyways i mean it was

[00:41:35] [SPEAKER_02]: just yeah if they don't care about that then i don't care about that so you want to talk

[00:41:40] [SPEAKER_02]: about geofencing sure so should i read uh paragraph 16 sure quote furthermore in its

[00:41:48] [SPEAKER_02]: april 29th 2024 motion in limonais paragraph 9 the prosecution requested the court to prevent

[00:41:54] [SPEAKER_02]: the defense from presenting evidence of geofencing even though that geofencing evidence

[00:41:58] [SPEAKER_02]: provided evidence that other third-party suspects were in the area of the crime scene

[00:42:01] [SPEAKER_02]: the time the prosecution is claiming that the crimes were committed end quote here's one question

[00:42:06] [SPEAKER_02]: if they're saying third-party suspects were in the area so they didn't mention kegan klein's

[00:42:12] [SPEAKER_02]: phone they didn't mention tony klein's phone they didn't mention any of the alleged odenes

[00:42:16] [SPEAKER_02]: phones so who ron logan they didn't even really get into that but i mean i imagine

[00:42:22] [SPEAKER_02]: his phone would have a reason to be in the area but what exactly are they talking about

[00:42:26] [SPEAKER_02]: if if geofencing had any applicability to what they were saying i imagine we would have heard a

[00:42:32] [SPEAKER_02]: lot more about this and is that is that fair to say also if you want us to believe a whole

[00:42:37] [SPEAKER_02]: group of men were doing this sacrifice in the woods none of them had their phones there was

[00:42:42] [SPEAKER_02]: no indication anything was going on i mean come on in addition to that it's hard to take

[00:42:48] [SPEAKER_02]: anything they say about geofencing too seriously when we have talked to people who know more

[00:42:54] [SPEAKER_02]: about technology than we do who are just sort of also observing this case and sort of outsiders

[00:43:00] [SPEAKER_02]: who just have that expertise what they've told us again and again is that they feel a lot of

[00:43:05] [SPEAKER_02]: the defense language conflates things like geofencing with things like tower dumps

[00:43:11] [SPEAKER_02]: with things like historical phone data so when they're acting like all of this stuff

[00:43:16] [SPEAKER_02]: is going to be lost if they can't talk about geofencing geofencing is a can be a very highly

[00:43:24] [SPEAKER_02]: inexact process by which you're talking about locations that are off by many many yards and

[00:43:31] [SPEAKER_02]: many many feet so i don't know i think i can understand why they're complaining but i also

[00:43:38] [SPEAKER_02]: feel like they've not really been super i guess exact or accurate with what they're

[00:43:44] [SPEAKER_02]: talking about when they're actually talking about a number of different types of cellular

[00:43:49] [SPEAKER_02]: evidence as opposed to just geofencing so i mean the fact that they're you know if law if

[00:43:56] [SPEAKER_02]: geofence if a geofence drag net brings in a guy who then law enforcement runs down and it turns

[00:44:05] [SPEAKER_02]: out he was in his house like many many yards away you know facetiming somebody and that

[00:44:13] [SPEAKER_02]: person is ruled out but what the defense wants to do i presume is just drag that person into

[00:44:18] [SPEAKER_02]: it and say well you know but the geofence said and it's like yeah but the geofence doesn't

[00:44:22] [SPEAKER_02]: you know it might show his phone like hovering near the bridge but they were able to confirm

[00:44:26] [SPEAKER_02]: that he wasn't there so what do you want to do here so i think they just want to have as much

[00:44:31] [SPEAKER_02]: chaos and innocent people dragged into this thing as possible so yeah that's just my thought

[00:44:37] [SPEAKER_01]: then they have a lengthy discussion in here of their argument that none of Richard

[00:44:45] [SPEAKER_01]: Allen's confessions should be admitted because he made them while incarcerated and being incarcerated

[00:44:53] [SPEAKER_01]: is somehow inherently coercive it's a strange argument and the judge didn't find it very

[00:45:02] [SPEAKER_01]: persuasive and i'm not sure that it is i didn't find it persuasive frankly and i think it's

[00:45:10] [SPEAKER_01]: noting that imagine if Richard Allen gave ridiculous confessions just confessions that were just

[00:45:20] [SPEAKER_01]: silly flights of fancy if you were the defense attorney wouldn't you be talking about the

[00:45:27] [SPEAKER_01]: content of those messages i think you would because just talking about the content of the

[00:45:32] [SPEAKER_01]: message of the confessions would discredit them yeah it would if he said something totally

[00:45:38] [SPEAKER_02]: wrong i strangled those girls that would be great for them to mention because that would

[00:45:42] [SPEAKER_01]: prove their point this guy's just saying anything but instead of talking about the content of the

[00:45:48] [SPEAKER_01]: confessions they're talking about all the circumstances and i think that's also maybe a

[00:45:53] [SPEAKER_01]: dog that didn't bark situation because if there was something wrong with confessions we'd be

[00:45:58] [SPEAKER_02]: hearing about yeah what did richard say exactly because i can tell you if he had

[00:46:04] [SPEAKER_02]: anything wrong himself i mean they certainly were willing to put out there like well some of these

[00:46:08] [SPEAKER_02]: things are wrong so that their you know lackeys can run with that but i'll note this when brian

[00:46:15] [SPEAKER_02]: harshman the detective with the indiana state police got up on the stand he said i never

[00:46:19] [SPEAKER_02]: heard richard allen say anything wrong yes that leads me to conclude that the people who were

[00:46:23] [SPEAKER_02]: saying things wrong were inmate companions who may have gotten details wrong or there may have

[00:46:28] [SPEAKER_02]: been a game of telephone going on with their friends and relatives if they were spreading it

[00:46:32] [SPEAKER_02]: you know to the you know outside the prison which is not the same thing as him getting details

[00:46:37] [SPEAKER_02]: wrong if he's getting where why not or even if you're just saying listen this one particular

[00:46:44] [SPEAKER_02]: confession was in the throes of a psychotic episode and here's why we think it was a

[00:46:49] [SPEAKER_02]: psychotic episode then that would be more compelling because they're going piece by

[00:46:53] [SPEAKER_02]: piece and saying here's why this is wrong here's why this is wrong here's why this should

[00:46:56] [SPEAKER_02]: be fine but instead it's like yo pay no attention to the confessions behind the curtain

[00:47:03] [SPEAKER_01]: yeah so they're talking about where the confessions happen instead of the content

[00:47:09] [SPEAKER_01]: of the confessions so that's the dog that didn't bark there that means that whatever he said

[00:47:14] [SPEAKER_02]: was probably pretty bad because they don't even want to touch it it's a third rail

[00:47:19] [SPEAKER_02]: it's a live wire the only way i see i mean i i think they might try to put if if this

[00:47:26] [SPEAKER_02]: goes on maybe they'll try to put some in a motion in order to kind of get ahead of it

[00:47:30] [SPEAKER_02]: because it can be diffusing to put bad facts in you know beforehand kind of get everyone

[00:47:35] [SPEAKER_02]: used to it but it yeah they it's a bad sign what next uh i think we're about done

[00:47:45] [SPEAKER_01]: we're about done wow okay uh let me read something here quote detect defendant alan's

[00:47:53] [SPEAKER_01]: criminal statements stem from a most unique detention circumstance alan nor his counsel

[00:47:58] [SPEAKER_01]: were given no choice in the matter the issue of first impression here is whether or not

[00:48:04] [SPEAKER_01]: defendant alan's due process rights were violated does the safekeeping statute require

[00:48:09] [SPEAKER_01]: the court to conduct a hearing to address the propriety of defendants pretrial detention

[00:48:14] [SPEAKER_01]: circumstances defendant alan is unaware of any rulings in the state addressing this very

[00:48:20] [SPEAKER_01]: issue end quote so they're acknowledging that there is no case law supporting their position

[00:48:26] [SPEAKER_01]: are they same token there's no case law opposing that position because no one has

[00:48:30] [SPEAKER_02]: has thought to raise this before okay well that means they might have a a shot i guess in that

[00:48:37] [SPEAKER_02]: way it's never been done before never been done before they can be the first i think

[00:48:42] [SPEAKER_02]: that's all i want to say uh what do you think about this i think we can both agree

[00:48:47] [SPEAKER_02]: that it makes sense to file an interlocutory appeal on some matter they've already put in all

[00:48:51] [SPEAKER_02]: this in for a penny and for a pound but when when we look at this i don't know that

[00:48:58] [SPEAKER_02]: it's necessary i mean from what we've speak to defense attorneys who are not affiliated with

[00:49:02] [SPEAKER_02]: this and prosecutors who are not affiliated with this case all the time and one common

[00:49:07] [SPEAKER_02]: refrain has been today you know she doesn't need to certify this this would just be a

[00:49:16] [SPEAKER_02]: i don't know it's like a lot of people that we heard from who are attorneys felt that she

[00:49:20] [SPEAKER_02]: might not because it was just you know not it's not a good argument but that doesn't mean she

[00:49:26] [SPEAKER_02]: won't and i can understand why they're going for it i guess yeah because again they've put

[00:49:31] [SPEAKER_02]: so much on some pretty bad theorizing that has gone nowhere so i i don't commend them

[00:49:39] [SPEAKER_02]: for it because they this never should have gone on this long they should have picked a pick a

[00:49:44] [SPEAKER_02]: horse that can actually race i mean they piled all this on like a little frail donkey that

[00:49:49] [SPEAKER_02]: has just collapsed under the weight of this nonsense and that's on them i'll say this i

[00:49:56] [SPEAKER_01]: don't blame them for trying i think that's what any defense attorney would do in this position

[00:50:01] [SPEAKER_01]: and i i don't know what judge gull will do i would not blame her if she said it's a waste

[00:50:07] [SPEAKER_01]: of time i'm going to refuse to certify it and i wouldn't blame her if she said okay let's take

[00:50:14] [SPEAKER_01]: it to let let the other court look at it so we don't have to worry about a frivolous appeal

[00:50:19] [SPEAKER_01]: later so i i don't know what she'll do i think she would be well within her rights to do

[00:50:25] [SPEAKER_02]: either so i guess we'll just see what happens but either way i think this signals that delays

[00:50:30] [SPEAKER_02]: are certainly on the way this defense team is not ready to go into anything and they certainly

[00:50:36] [SPEAKER_02]: be without odinism and even if you know i mean i don't know i just think they're never going to

[00:50:41] [SPEAKER_01]: be ready it's been close to two years yeah well thanks for listening everybody thanks

[00:50:51] [SPEAKER_01]: thanks so much for listening to the murder sheet if you have a tip concerning one of

[00:50:56] [SPEAKER_01]: the cases we cover please email us at murder sheet at gmail.com if you have actionable

[00:51:04] [SPEAKER_01]: information about an unsolved crime please report it to the appropriate authorities if you're

[00:51:12] [SPEAKER_02]: interested in joining our patreon that's available at www.patreon.com murder sheet

[00:51:21] [SPEAKER_02]: if you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests you can do so at

[00:51:26] [SPEAKER_02]: www.buymeacoffee.com murder sheet we very much appreciate any support special thanks to kevin

[00:51:36] [SPEAKER_01]: tyler greenlee who composed the music for the murder sheet and who you can find on the web at

[00:51:42] [SPEAKER_02]: kevin tg.com if you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered

[00:51:48] [SPEAKER_02]: you can join the murder sheet discussion group on facebook we mostly focus our time on research

[00:51:55] [SPEAKER_02]: reporting so we're not on social media much we do try to check our email account but we ask for

[00:52:02] [SPEAKER_02]: patience as we often receive a lot of messages thanks again for listening beat the summertime

[00:52:08] [SPEAKER_02]: sluggishness and enhance your every day with our wonderful sponsor via hemp this is a company

[00:52:14] [SPEAKER_01]: that crafts award-winning premium thc and thc free gummies with high quality hemp grown right

[00:52:21] [SPEAKER_01]: here on american farms all for an excellent value especially for murder sheet listeners who

[00:52:27] [SPEAKER_01]: get a special deal if you're 21 or older you can experience it for yourself and get 15% off

[00:52:33] [SPEAKER_01]: your first order with our exclusive code m sheet at via hemp.com that's v i i a h e m p.com

[00:52:45] [SPEAKER_02]: each of via's gummies is crafted to give you a specific mood get creative get some rest get

[00:52:53] [SPEAKER_02]: focused get some pleasure all with via's delicious gummies no matter what you're looking for via has

[00:53:00] [SPEAKER_02]: you covered their grapefruit cbg and cbd flow state gummies help me feel energized and focused

[00:53:07] [SPEAKER_02]: to get a lot done this summer in terms of scheduling conducting interviews running around

[00:53:12] [SPEAKER_01]: sources and more you don't need a medical card to enjoy via hemp and these products ship legally

[00:53:18] [SPEAKER_02]: to all 50 states if you're 21 and older head to via hemp.com and use the code m sheet to receive

[00:53:25] [SPEAKER_02]: 15% off that's v i i a h e m p.com and use code m sheet at checkout after you purchase they

[00:53:35] [SPEAKER_02]: ask you where you heard about them please support our show and tell them we sent you

[00:53:40] [SPEAKER_02]: every day with via