The Delphi Murders: The Defense's Sentencing Memorandum

[00:00:00] Content Warning, This Episode Contains Discussion of the Brutal Murder of Two Girls.

[00:00:05] Okay, so it is December 19th, 2024. We are on the eve of the sentencing hearing in the Delphi Murders case where, of course, convicted murderer Richard Allen will be sentenced for murdering Liberty German and Abigail Williams to Delphi Indiana teenagers who he killed in 2017.

[00:00:25] And...

[00:00:26] A line is already formed, actually.

[00:00:28] Yeah.

[00:00:28] We record this on Thursday morning, a little less than 24 hours before the sentencing takes place.

[00:00:38] A line started forming yesterday afternoon, believe it or not.

[00:00:42] So we are taking time away from that line to talk about the defense's sentencing memorandum which came out this morning.

[00:00:53] Yes, indeed. It was filed yesterday, but we only saw it today.

[00:01:00] My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist.

[00:01:03] And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[00:01:06] And this is The Murder Sheet.

[00:01:08] We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews and deep dives into murder cases.

[00:01:14] We're The Murder Sheet.

[00:01:16] And this is The Delphi Murders, the defense's sentencing memorandum.

[00:02:07] I think before we get really into the meat of this memorandum, it might be worth taking a few moments to talk a little bit about process.

[00:02:17] So after a person is convicted by a jury and prior to the sentencing, there is a pre-sentence investigation that is done.

[00:02:28] What is that, Anya?

[00:02:28] The pre-sentence investigation and report is done typically by a probation office in a county.

[00:02:35] And what it entails is the investigators or I guess the probation officers will go through and compile a very comprehensive report on various factors of a convict's life.

[00:02:52] You know, so that could mean things like history of mental illness, history of abuse that they faced as a child.

[00:02:59] It could mean, you know, whether or not in jail they are behaving in a remorseful way or a non-remorseful way or, you know, I mean, one thing that came up in Kagan Klein's sentencing pre-sentencing report in that, you know, related case was, you know, he had been convicted or he had pled guilty to basically charge.

[00:03:21] He had charges around child sexual abuse materials.

[00:03:24] And then it came out that while he was incarcerated in jail, he was actually soliciting from adult women sexual images.

[00:03:32] So it sort of was like.

[00:03:33] Same sort of behavior.

[00:03:33] Same sort of behavior except with women, adult women.

[00:03:37] And so that kind of showed a lack of remorse.

[00:03:39] So I think what what this is supposed to do is just provide a judge with a really comprehensive portrait of a person so that they can rule accordingly.

[00:03:48] Look at things like mitigating factors or maybe even stuff that might be aggravating.

[00:03:54] Those are big words, Anya.

[00:03:56] You've confused me.

[00:03:56] What does mitigating mean?

[00:03:57] What is aggravating?

[00:03:58] I mean, I don't know.

[00:03:59] I don't know what the technical.

[00:04:00] I mean, I think mitigating basically means something that kind of adds more context that maybe makes someone not look quite as bad in it.

[00:04:10] Aggravating means something that adds context that makes it worse.

[00:04:13] So if I if I'm stealing cereal, to use Kevin's ridiculous example, if I'm stealing cereal and it turns out I'm stealing cereal because my children are starving at home and I have no money and I'm just acting out of love for my kids.

[00:04:27] That's maybe a mitigating factor.

[00:04:29] Maybe I'm not so bad.

[00:04:30] If I pull a gun on the grocery store clerk and tell them I'm going to kill them and like send them a bunch of threats afterwards, that's aggravating.

[00:04:41] I would think because it's like I'm being needlessly a jerk about the situation.

[00:04:45] So basically this pre-sentence investigation is a tool designed to give the judge the information the judge needs in order to impose the appropriate sentence.

[00:04:57] Think about if you were a judge, think about the information you would want to have in front of you.

[00:05:02] That's the sort of thing that is in a pre-sentence investigation.

[00:05:06] So with that said, the defense of the convicted person also has an opportunity to try to make arguments before the judge in the sentencing procedure.

[00:05:20] And they can make these arguments during the hearing itself or they can make the arguments prior to the hearing in a memorandum.

[00:05:30] And these would be arguments they would make basically saying, here's why you should give our client as minimal of a sentence as possible.

[00:05:40] And in this particular case, Richard Allen's defense team has filed such a memorandum and it makes for interesting reading.

[00:05:51] Yeah, I would say so.

[00:05:55] It's a situation where they're kind of almost, it feels like, to sum it up, it feels like a team that is taking its ball and going home, essentially.

[00:06:06] Yeah.

[00:06:07] They're saying, we don't want to play with you anymore.

[00:06:12] And we can go into specifically how that manifests itself.

[00:06:15] Which we will, which we will.

[00:06:15] Yes, but that is kind of in a nutshell.

[00:06:18] It's six pages, it's pretty short.

[00:06:20] It's written by Andrew Baldwin.

[00:06:21] Let me read from some of it.

[00:06:24] Quote, Richard Allen maintains his innocence and is hopeful that the appellate process will provide him with an opportunity to present a full defense at a second trial.

[00:06:35] For this reason, Richard's defense counsel advised Richard Allen to not participate in providing information for the pre-sentence investigation report to the Allen County Probation Department.

[00:06:48] As defense counsel assessed that there was no value in Richard Allen continuing to talk with state actors, unquote.

[00:06:55] What do you make of that?

[00:06:57] Well, I mean, it's like I said, they're taking their ball and they're going home.

[00:06:59] We actually ran this by defense attorney Mark Inman, you know, a very, very seasoned defense attorney who we've had on the show numerous times because we just wanted to get a sense.

[00:07:10] Is this really unusual for a defense attorney to advise their client not to go along with a PSI?

[00:07:18] And what he indicated is that, you know, looking at this memorandum, it sort of fits in their larger strategy of just sort of like almost saying, well, we'll just do everything on appeal.

[00:07:29] It's not necessarily that surprising in his view, in other words.

[00:07:32] So it's not necessarily shocking.

[00:07:35] But it's something that I think just kind of.

[00:07:38] I mean, I guess the kind of cynic in me wonders if they didn't want him talking with anybody else, because the more people he talks to, the more he digs his own grave.

[00:07:48] Richard Allen is a man who has a propensity to offer confessions to almost anyone who listens.

[00:07:56] And so if I were his defense counsel, I would be concerned that if he participated in this pre-sentence investigation, that he would end up confessing to the probation investigators.

[00:08:10] Or maybe saying other things that could be damaging.

[00:08:12] I mean, just like he's said all manner of things.

[00:08:15] He's he's like masturbated in front of people.

[00:08:19] He's not he's he's a complete loose cannon.

[00:08:21] And I can understand from this defense team's perspective, not wanting probation officers to be around that because it almost might just add to the heap of of stuff that Alan is sort of, you know, kind of added to this case in terms of like harming himself.

[00:08:40] At the same time, I'm sure they assess this.

[00:08:44] Having your client participate in the pre-sentence investigation.

[00:08:48] That's a tool.

[00:08:49] That's an opportunity where you can try to make a case to benefit your client because your client in talking with these investigators can try to paint a more sympathetic portrait of his background in life.

[00:09:03] And obviously they did not feel Richard Allen was capable of that.

[00:09:09] Yes.

[00:09:10] And I mean, I will note.

[00:09:12] I mean, I think there's a lot in here and we can go more into this, but I think there's a lot in this memorandum that feels like it's been written for a YouTube audience.

[00:09:22] This is something we've kind of noted with this defense team quite a lot.

[00:09:26] They're writing for not just the general public, but actually the conspiracy theorists.

[00:09:31] So so that's fun.

[00:09:33] And this is kind of in line with that.

[00:09:35] Yeah, we will have like some aspects of that.

[00:09:40] There's certainly a number of people out there who are reasonable people who were waiting for evidence to come out before they made their decisions about whether or not they believe Mr. Allen was guilty of this crime.

[00:09:54] But the people that the defense really seemed to want to woo in court were the diehard conspiracy theorists who were positing huge theories of corruption and bad behavior by state actors.

[00:10:13] And in fact, they this memorandum, they even note that they are upset that this precinct investigation was done by the Allen County Probation Department.

[00:10:27] I don't know if they're trying to suggest that Allen County Probation Department is somehow under the thumb of Judge Gull and is therefore not to be trusted.

[00:10:35] I don't know what the implication there is.

[00:10:38] Yeah, that seems to be the implication.

[00:10:40] There's a whole footnote about it.

[00:10:41] And that's what that's when I see that.

[00:10:43] I'm like, this is for YouTube, because I mean, as far as as far as anything goes, when we talked to Mr.

[00:10:52] Inman, I mean, he noted that, you know, that that that wasn't necessarily super shocking to him because the judge is from Allen County.

[00:11:01] So, you know what?

[00:11:03] I mean, OK.

[00:11:05] I mean, we've certainly had some pretty severe criticism for Judge Francis Gull in this process.

[00:11:12] And those will continue.

[00:11:13] But, you know, I mean, we have I mean, we've been we've been highly critical about elements of how she's handled this case.

[00:11:19] And I'm not a fan.

[00:11:20] Well, you know, but it's not about being a fan.

[00:11:23] It's about it's about like, you know, do we do we have a reasonable criticism?

[00:11:26] And we feel in some respects we do in other respects.

[00:11:30] I feel like she ran a pretty clean case.

[00:11:32] I would say the couple of decisions she made during trial that I felt were a bit.

[00:11:39] Maybe marginal were beneficial to the defense, and those largely had to do with letting the defense essentially put together a bunch of clips, a clip show, so to speak, of Richard Allen acting bizarrely in prison.

[00:11:55] And I felt that that would be something that would be, again, possibly beneficial to the defense.

[00:12:02] I guess it could have backfired.

[00:12:04] But, you know, in the sense that, like, oh, look at poor Richard Allen, you know.

[00:12:08] And so she basically gave them a huge amount of leeway with that.

[00:12:13] And, you know, I thought that was kind of problematic because I felt like, you know, they were just kind of clipped like they were clicking around like, OK, we're going to skip ahead two minutes here.

[00:12:21] And it was like, how is this going to ever be replicated?

[00:12:24] This seems kind of ridiculous.

[00:12:26] And so, again, that was something she did that I thought was questionable that benefited the defense.

[00:12:31] Yeah, several things can be true at once.

[00:12:35] Judge Gull was absolutely the wrong judge for this case.

[00:12:38] She has mishandled many aspects of it.

[00:12:42] As I said, even as we speak, there is a line outside the courthouse for a hearing that's going to be taking place nearly 24 hours from now.

[00:12:52] That sort of undignified, unbecoming thing is entirely the result of bad decisions made by Judge Gull.

[00:12:58] All of that is true.

[00:12:59] It is also true that she protected Richard Allen's constitutional rights.

[00:13:04] He received a fair trial.

[00:13:06] Tis the season for gift giving.

[00:13:08] So support our wonderful new sponsor, Quince, and get yourself some affordable, high quality gifts.

[00:13:14] Quince is a company that specializes in making the finer things in life, cashmere, gold, Italian handbags, affordable on any budget.

[00:13:22] All items are priced 50 to 80 percent less than similar brands.

[00:13:26] Their wonderful line of Mongolian cashmere sweaters starts at just $50.

[00:13:32] They pulled this off by cutting out the middleman and partnering directly with ethical, safe, and responsible factories.

[00:13:40] We recently gave ourselves the gift of Quince.

[00:13:43] Kevin got their suede bomber jacket.

[00:13:46] It's so comfortable and warm.

[00:13:47] And I think he looks really cute wearing it.

[00:13:50] I myself got a black Mongolian cashmere v-neck sweater and a dark blue Mongolian cashmere turtleneck sweater.

[00:13:56] I'm really struck by the softness of the fabric.

[00:13:59] I also really like the way I look in these pieces, which for me is a big coup.

[00:14:03] Quince also has 14-karat gold jewelry, Italian leather handbags, and European linen sheet sets.

[00:14:12] Give the gift of luxury this holiday season without the luxury price tag.

[00:14:17] Go to quince.com slash msheet for 365-day returns, plus get free shipping on your order.

[00:14:26] That's q-u-i-n-c-e dot com slash msheet to get free shipping and 365-day returns.

[00:14:37] Quince.com slash msheet.

[00:14:41] Yeah, it's like you have to have some, you know, it's helpful to have some nuance on things.

[00:14:45] And, like, it's just like anything in life.

[00:14:49] Something can have a problem.

[00:14:51] You know, like you can have a house that has a leaky roof, but that doesn't mean the rest of the house needs to be torn down.

[00:14:57] Maybe you just, you know, like it's, but, you know, unfortunately true crime sometimes doesn't feel like it allows for a lot of nuance.

[00:15:04] You're either on one team or the other, and it's like it's not a sports game, you know?

[00:15:09] When you were talking about the Colts versus the Chiefs, you know, if you have a strong opinion that you like the Colts, then that's fine.

[00:15:16] There's nothing, that's all good.

[00:15:18] But this isn't a sports game.

[00:15:21] Let me say this before we get back to the memorandum.

[00:15:24] I absolutely believe she was the wrong judge for this case.

[00:15:27] I believe she made a mess of public access issues to a ridiculous extent.

[00:15:34] I'm not a fan, but there is no hint at all that there is anything corrupt or inappropriate about her behavior.

[00:15:45] Yeah, there just isn't.

[00:15:47] That is silly nonsense.

[00:15:50] I think it's ridiculous.

[00:15:52] I think it's actually like, I mean, I don't know.

[00:15:56] I think it's irresponsible at some point for any sort of attorneys who should know better to be courting, you know, online lunatics to this extent.

[00:16:06] I don't think that courting online cranks helped them.

[00:16:10] No, they lost.

[00:16:12] And I think they lost in a way that made them look bad.

[00:16:15] I think they lost in a humiliating fashion.

[00:16:17] Now, one thing I will say, and I'll be curious about your take on this.

[00:16:22] The implicit message of this memorandum is like, and we would have won too if it wasn't for Odinism not coming in.

[00:16:31] And let me just say my thought on that.

[00:16:33] And I'll be curious about your thought.

[00:16:35] There's this kind of lost cause movement going on with Odinism.

[00:16:41] We've done some episodes on why we think that that is nonsense.

[00:16:45] But, you know, when you say it to people who don't know any better, hey, they wouldn't let the defense do their preferred theory.

[00:16:52] Yeah, that sounds bad.

[00:16:54] That sounds, oh, my gosh, you know, wow.

[00:16:55] OK, maybe maybe they would have won.

[00:16:57] But like but I'm just begging people.

[00:17:00] Read the Frank's memorandum.

[00:17:02] Read all the Frank's memorandums.

[00:17:03] You know, listen to some of our coverage of this.

[00:17:05] It was not a good theory.

[00:17:06] I think if they'd done Odinism, we wouldn't have been waiting for the verdict as long and it would have come back guilty.

[00:17:13] I think it would have.

[00:17:14] I think it was a ridiculous, childish theory that basically catered to the lowest common denominator of thinker out there.

[00:17:21] And I just don't think that those people were on the jury.

[00:17:24] I think the jury, based on their questions throughout trial, was common sense based, was factual, was thinking about things in a thoughtful manner and considering them.

[00:17:34] And I don't think that that is who the Odinism theory is for.

[00:17:37] Yes. And I would also say before we get back to the memorandum, which I would like to do, that Odinism is a theory that when you first hear about it, it's not unreasonable to be interested in it or even tantalized by it.

[00:17:51] I was interested in it.

[00:17:53] So when Anya says it's a silly thing to believe in, she means it's just a silly thing to believe in once you've learned about it and know all of the details and how they don't hold on it.

[00:18:01] It's like if you're on a – to use a stupid example, if you're on a date with someone and they seem really great at first, right?

[00:18:08] And you're like, wow, I'm really interested in this person.

[00:18:10] And then as you get to know more and more about them, red flag, red flag, red flag, red flag.

[00:18:16] It's that kind of thing.

[00:18:17] It lures you in with intrigue and interest.

[00:18:20] And I certainly don't have an issue with people being interested in it or just not knowing a lot about it and kind of being sucked in.

[00:18:27] But I think if you actually study it, you will realize there's nothing there.

[00:18:33] It stinks.

[00:18:34] And I'm like that's kind of where anyone – the thing that separates people I feel like who – when you have people who have been immersed in this for a long time and have really gotten to know that theory, it's often a very different conversation and a very different set of opinions than when you have people who are just kind of reading the headlines.

[00:18:53] There's nothing wrong with that.

[00:18:54] There's topics where I just know about the headlines, so I'm not like denigrating anyone from that perspective.

[00:19:00] It's just like people don't know.

[00:19:03] Like it's not something that they did a good job putting together.

[00:19:06] Let's get back to this memorandum.

[00:19:09] So earlier I just read a quote from a paragraph in which they said, Richard Allen, we advised him not to participate in the pre-sentence investigation process.

[00:19:22] That is followed by a longer paragraph which says literally the same thing.

[00:19:26] We advised him not to participate.

[00:19:29] We don't want him to have any more contact with state actors.

[00:19:33] That's also a thing we've seen from this defense attorney.

[00:19:37] It's a lot of repetition.

[00:19:40] Conciseness is a skill and it's often – that was actually one thing that a prosecutor, Nicholas McClelland, really succeeded at with trial.

[00:19:49] Oftentimes he would just not cross-examine witnesses and it was like let's just move on basically.

[00:19:54] Or he would say things in five words that then the defense would have their opening go on for like 45 minutes.

[00:20:01] And it's like wow, it's better to often kind of make a point and move on.

[00:20:08] That's followed by another section I want to quote from.

[00:20:15] Quote, additionally, Richard Allen is 52 years old.

[00:20:19] Pursuit to Indiana code, Richard is facing 45 to 130 years of imprisonment.

[00:20:25] In the unlikely scenario that under the code this court would sentence Richard Allen to the mandatory minimum sentence and run the counts concurrently,

[00:20:35] on his best day Richard Allen would receive a 45-year mandatory prison sentence.

[00:20:41] With good time credit this would amount to 33 and three quarters actual years in prison.

[00:20:47] This means Richard on his best day at sentencing would be released from prison at 85 years of age.

[00:20:55] End quote.

[00:20:56] I think that is also a point worth stressing is that obviously we're covering this sentencing as we should and we're all interested in it.

[00:21:08] But to a certain extent we know what's going to happen.

[00:21:10] We know he is going to receive a sentence that is going to absolutely guarantee that he will die behind bars.

[00:21:19] Yeah.

[00:21:20] And this essentially is acknowledged that because they're saying even if everything goes our way, he would be at least 85 years old when he would be released.

[00:21:30] And everything is not going to go their way.

[00:21:33] He's not going to get the absolute minimum sentence on just one count.

[00:21:36] Not on the brutal murder of two girls who he basically, I don't know, I think forcing two kids to strip naked and then forcing them across a creek is like psychological torture.

[00:21:50] The terror and shame and embarrassment they must have faced by being violated like that by this man.

[00:21:57] So yeah, I don't think he's going to get the minimum.

[00:21:59] I don't think he should get the minimum.

[00:22:01] I think people like him should die in prison.

[00:22:03] He will.

[00:22:05] So that is followed by another paragraph where, again, they repeat.

[00:22:08] So we told him not to participate in that.

[00:22:11] So a lot of.

[00:22:12] Got it.

[00:22:13] Yeah.

[00:22:15] There's a lot of repetition here.

[00:22:18] But, you know, it is a defense filing.

[00:22:21] So.

[00:22:23] That is followed by they say he was convicted of a total of four counts for two murders.

[00:22:31] So two of those counts should be dismissed.

[00:22:36] A lot of people have had questions about this.

[00:22:38] So I'm actually super glad that they raised this and it seems reasonable for them to mention this.

[00:22:43] Can you talk about what they're saying here and why, you know, a lot of people.

[00:22:48] There's two victims.

[00:22:49] How can there be four murder counts?

[00:22:51] And can I explain that quickly?

[00:22:53] Please do.

[00:22:54] My understanding.

[00:22:55] And I'm not the lawyer here.

[00:22:57] So correct me if I'm wrong.

[00:22:58] But my understanding is that.

[00:23:01] So essentially, he was charged with felony murder and murder for both girls.

[00:23:08] Felony murder means that.

[00:23:10] You are committing some kind of felony.

[00:23:14] Typically, something specified in the statute, as in this case.

[00:23:18] So something like kidnapping or, you know, armed robbery or something.

[00:23:23] And someone dies as a result of that felony.

[00:23:26] So that means that Kevin and I can be robbing a store.

[00:23:29] Maybe we're robbing a cereal factory.

[00:23:32] We've gotten really gotten really crazy about this.

[00:23:35] And we're speeding away with our ill-gotten gains.

[00:23:40] And we hit somebody and they die with our car.

[00:23:44] So that would be a situation where I might be the one driving.

[00:23:47] But Kevin might be charged based on felony murder.

[00:23:51] Because it's like, you know, maybe I chose to hit someone because they were in the way.

[00:23:56] And I wanted to get out of there with my cereal.

[00:23:58] And he's participating.

[00:23:59] He's helping me with the robbery.

[00:24:01] And somebody died as a result.

[00:24:02] So that's what felony murder means.

[00:24:03] And felony murder in this case meant that if Richard Allen was convicted of kidnapping the girls, he'd also be responsible for their murders.

[00:24:13] So what I envision, and I don't know this, but what I envision is that McClellan and his team were essentially giving the jury options, saying,

[00:24:20] if you don't feel like we quite got to murder, if you feel like he's bridge guy and he kidnapped them, well, guess what?

[00:24:26] It's also murder.

[00:24:27] And to be clear, when you think of kidnapping, you might envision some grand scenario like the Lindbergh baby and ransom notes left.

[00:24:38] But in essence, bridge guy, Richard Allen, was guilty of kidnapping the girls as soon as he used force to make them go somewhere they didn't want to go.

[00:24:47] So when he says guys down the hill and leads them down the hill against their will, for all intents and purposes, he's kidnapped them.

[00:24:54] You do not have to go a long distance.

[00:24:55] It's not about that.

[00:24:57] It's more about the movement of one place to another by force, by threats, things like that.

[00:25:01] So now what they're saying here is that he can't get sentences.

[00:25:07] He can't get like more time stacked on top of each other with all four counts.

[00:25:12] Is that what they're saying?

[00:25:13] Essentially, he needs to have that pared down to two just based on the statute.

[00:25:19] And I expect that will happen.

[00:25:20] Yeah.

[00:25:21] I mean, that's what's supposed to happen.

[00:25:23] Right.

[00:25:23] Yeah.

[00:25:23] Yeah.

[00:25:24] So nothing surprising there.

[00:25:26] So then they say, let's look at some of the mitigating factors that are mentioned in statutes.

[00:25:34] And as we mentioned, mitigating factors, these are the things that would make a judge, at least in theory, say, oh, this guy isn't quite so bad.

[00:25:43] He deserves mercy for certain reasons.

[00:25:47] And one reason they list is that Richard Allen has no prior criminal history, quote, and he maintains his innocence.

[00:25:56] His lack of any prior criminal history is a mitigating factor.

[00:26:02] Makes sense.

[00:26:03] So, you know, this is a mitigating factor that they can roll out without necessarily like implicating him or making his situation worse.

[00:26:10] It's just a fact.

[00:26:11] He did not have a criminal history.

[00:26:13] Let's break that out.

[00:26:13] But if it was, you know, something where it's like, well, he feels remorse for what he did, then obviously that would be problematic to kind of admit that in court.

[00:26:24] So this is something that's a little bit more neutral from their perspective.

[00:26:28] And here's another mitigating factor that I will read from this memorandum.

[00:26:32] Quote, Richard Allen was the main breadwinner for the household before he was arrested and sent to Westville prison without a hearing or attorneys present.

[00:26:40] His imprisonment has created and will continue to create a hardship on his wife of 30 plus years, Kathy Allen, unquote.

[00:26:47] So they're saying he needs a little bit of mercy because it's creating a hardship on his wife, Kathy Allen.

[00:26:54] And there's also another thing in that, what I just quoted, that I think is interesting and worth noting.

[00:27:03] You often hear a term that when couples argue something called kitchen sinking, where in the course of the argument, if you're upset with your spouse or your partner or whoever for one reason, and you sense you may be losing the argument, you might toss in suddenly other things they've done that have upset you over the years.

[00:27:27] You're just kitchen sinking.

[00:27:28] You're just throwing in everything you can't.

[00:27:30] And I think it is interesting that in the midst of their making this valid point about Kathy Allen and how this will affect her, they're throwing in this point about him being sent to Westville prison without a hearing or attorneys present.

[00:27:49] Yeah.

[00:27:50] That's kitchen sinking.

[00:27:51] Whatever arguments you have to make on that point really don't apply or are pertinent to the point of any hardships that may or may not exist for Kathy Allen because her husband killed two girls.

[00:28:06] I know that in taxes, in tax forms, dependents are people who are like children, stepchildren, younger siblings perhaps.

[00:28:18] So I find it interesting.

[00:28:19] I'd be curious if that, you know, dependent, I wouldn't think of a spouse as a dependent necessarily.

[00:28:25] So I don't know.

[00:28:27] That may be a broader term where it's kind of anyone who might depend on somebody in any sense.

[00:28:33] Obviously, having a two income household is, you know, going to be better for a lot of people than being a single person and having a spouse incarcerated.

[00:28:42] So I'm not necessarily saying that that wouldn't be a hardship.

[00:28:45] I'm just saying it's interesting that, you know, you would think of it more of like this person is, you know, underage children who they need to support versus like a spouse who can work themselves.

[00:28:56] And certainly we know that Kathy Allen was employed prior to all of this going down.

[00:29:01] So I just found that, I don't know, probably over overanalyzing it.

[00:29:04] But yeah.

[00:29:05] What do you think of them throwing in that thing about Westville in there?

[00:29:07] It's just typical for these guys.

[00:29:09] I mean, that's what they do.

[00:29:10] I mean, like they're like the kind of like if these if these filings were conversations, they would be the people you would try to avoid at a party because they'd be just kind of inserting their little hobby horses into everything.

[00:29:21] You know, they're like probably me back in college when I just wanted to talk about Jamestown all the time.

[00:29:26] Like, yeah, you see that Cubs game?

[00:29:28] Well, kind of reminded me of 1607.

[00:29:30] It's like, get away from me.

[00:29:33] So, I mean, I relate to that.

[00:29:34] But I think I think it it just I think what they're they think they're doing is they're kind of, you know, it's like if you're watching a play, you know, like, you know, if you're watching your Shakespeare, you have the character, you know, Iago gets on the stage and then like he's like, oh, Othello, you're really great.

[00:29:50] I love you.

[00:29:51] And then he kind of goes to the audience and is like, but I'm really plotting against him.

[00:29:55] Spoiler for Othello.

[00:29:57] It's kind of like an aside to the perceived audience of online netizens, I think.

[00:30:02] And I think that's just kind of stupid because, I mean, that's not their real audience.

[00:30:07] The real audience is Judge Galt.

[00:30:09] The judge who they continuously insult in all these filings, which I think most trial attorneys would tell you is not a good idea.

[00:30:18] Now, I don't think it necessarily like affected the outcome of this trial, because, again, I think she kind of erred on the side of being overly lenient with them.

[00:30:26] But I just think it's kind of just not what you would typically see.

[00:30:31] They list some non-statutory mitigating factors.

[00:30:35] Quote, one, Richard Allen served the United States Army National Guard for approximately 10 years, having enlisted when he was in high school.

[00:30:44] And two, Richard Allen has a long history of mental illness, having been treated for major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder throughout his life.

[00:30:54] Unquote.

[00:30:55] So, I mean, I mean, obviously appreciate everyone who serves in our armed forces.

[00:31:01] And so they're kind of saying that, you know, that should be.

[00:31:05] A factor in him being.

[00:31:08] You know.

[00:31:09] Having a lenient sentence, I guess.

[00:31:12] I don't really follow, but OK.

[00:31:14] OK.

[00:31:15] And I think with the mental illness, I guess they're bringing that up because.

[00:31:21] You know.

[00:31:23] But it's kind of odd because it's like they're saying he's innocent, but also like go easy on him because he's mentally ill.

[00:31:28] So it's kind of.

[00:31:32] I don't know.

[00:31:33] I want to read from the conclusion.

[00:31:35] Quote, Richard Allen maintains his innocence and looks forward to the appellate process, which he anticipates will include adjudication by a neutral, detached and unbiased tribunal.

[00:31:48] Unquote.

[00:31:49] And that is interesting to me because, again, this is a memorandum that is by design written for one person.

[00:31:59] That is Judge Gould.

[00:32:00] You're trying to persuade Judge Gould to see things the way you do.

[00:32:03] And in this memorandum, they are saying, oh, he'll be found innocent if he gets a neutral, detached and unbiased tribunal.

[00:32:11] So the implication is that Judge Gould is neither neutral nor detached nor unbiased.

[00:32:16] So in the course of the memorandum, which is by design intended to persuade her, they are insulting her.

[00:32:25] And that to me is one of the tells which reveals that this is not written for Judge Gould.

[00:32:33] This is written for the YouTube audience.

[00:32:35] This is written for the conspiracy theorists.

[00:32:38] And naive journalists, frankly.

[00:32:40] And naive journalists.

[00:32:41] This is not written to benefit their client.

[00:32:44] This is an attempt at PR and trying to appeal to.

[00:32:51] Yeah.

[00:32:52] This is what, like, I, you know, I think a lot of journalists in the beginning, and I think we were in this boat, to be clear.

[00:32:58] Like, you and me were firmly in this boat.

[00:33:01] But in the beginning, they'd be like, wow, this is written so forcefully.

[00:33:05] They must have something.

[00:33:07] And at first we were kind of, we were like, wow, okay, they're making some feisty points.

[00:33:13] I don't know why you would say that unless you had something to back it up.

[00:33:16] You know, not necessarily saying, oh, we must believe in hook, line, and sinker, but being like, there's got to be something.

[00:33:22] And it just reminds me of, like, if you're playing poker with people, you know, I could be sitting there taunting my opponents.

[00:33:29] I could be looking real cocky.

[00:33:31] I could be smirking.

[00:33:32] I could be like, ha ha, I'm going to win.

[00:33:34] And have a terrible hand.

[00:33:36] Okay?

[00:33:36] It's called bluffing.

[00:33:38] Okay?

[00:33:38] And I just need people to kind of, like, understand that because I just feel like there's been way too much credulousness around this.

[00:33:46] And it's like, in the beginning, I could understand that we all were in that boat.

[00:33:50] But at this point, we're at sentencing.

[00:33:54] They lost.

[00:33:55] Okay?

[00:33:57] Their Odinism theory fell apart during the three-day hearing over the summer.

[00:34:02] It's been a series of just defeats.

[00:34:05] And at a certain point, you know, if you're the general and you've lost that many battles and you're still going out and being like, but I bet when we fight a fair fight, then we'll win.

[00:34:15] Maybe people should be a little bit skeptical at that point.

[00:34:19] Because, yeah, maybe you just don't have what it takes to win.

[00:34:24] Maybe you have a guilty client who kind of sabotaged himself and you tried to kind of throw something together that was really, you know, appealing to, like, stupid people on the internet.

[00:34:34] And it just didn't work.

[00:34:36] And maybe that's the story.

[00:34:37] Maybe it's not that there's some huge, you know, ace in the hole.

[00:34:40] And I just feel like people kind of respond to the tone in a way that's, like, not backed up by the facts.

[00:34:49] Yes.

[00:34:50] And I just feel it is bizarre to insult the judge in this memorandum, which should be trying to persuade the judge.

[00:34:58] Yeah.

[00:34:59] I mean, I guess they're saying, well, we're out of here in a minute.

[00:35:02] So I guess we'll do some parting insults on the way out.

[00:35:05] Here's the next line quote.

[00:35:06] Richard Allen believes that he will be afforded due process under the law and will be permitted to present a full and complete defense at a future trial in this cause, unquote.

[00:35:16] So these defense attorneys are being defensive and they're saying it wasn't our fault that we lost.

[00:35:22] It was because mean judge Cole didn't let us do a full and complete defense.

[00:35:27] So, again, this is not a message to judge Cole.

[00:35:31] This is a message to the public throughout this entire process.

[00:35:35] They have used filings in order to evade and get around the gag order to communicate to the public.

[00:35:42] And I believe that by doing so, they ill-serve the interests of their client, Richard Allen.

[00:35:48] It's you're supposed to be communicating to the judge and trying to, you know, work that angle before you go to the public.

[00:35:56] I mean, I can understand that if you like lose and then you kind of pivot.

[00:35:59] But to do that this entire time was just I mean, it obviously didn't work.

[00:36:06] I think the goal was to try to basically kick off such a media storm that they kind of polluted any jury pool.

[00:36:12] But I mean, frankly, he's not a sympathetic client.

[00:36:16] He's just not.

[00:36:17] And it's it's such a heinous crime.

[00:36:19] I think that was always going to be an uphill battle.

[00:36:22] And they certainly succeeded in really titillating like a certain segment of the online community.

[00:36:28] But beyond that, I just think it looked foolish and kind of sleazy, frankly.

[00:36:32] And I think people tend to prefer to live in reality.

[00:36:39] And having something that is just kind of a conspiracy theory without any real meat to it just wasn't going to fly in retrospect.

[00:36:47] And frankly, that they're still kind of like, oh, but if only Odinism had come in, it's like, you know, or if only you had constructed a better defense.

[00:36:56] Because I think that probably would have gotten him a lot further.

[00:36:59] And by a better defense, I mean, listen, I think their hands were tied to a certain extent by their clients.

[00:37:04] So I'm not really putting the entire blame on the defense team here.

[00:37:07] But I think a better defense would have been something a little bit more reality based and something where they weren't constantly writing checks that bounced.

[00:37:15] You know, don't come out and voir dire and say, oh, well, there's mysterious hairs.

[00:37:20] Ooh.

[00:37:21] And then like disappear behind a curtain and then come back out later.

[00:37:24] And yeah, it was a Kelsey's German's hair, Kelsey Siebert.

[00:37:28] You know, but you know, but doesn't that make police look bad?

[00:37:30] It's like, no, you don't you don't entice people with that.

[00:37:34] You don't come and say, hey, come watch the greatest show on earth and then come back and say, actually, it's just, you know, it's five minutes.

[00:37:41] And it kind of isn't that impressive.

[00:37:43] But, you know, come in.

[00:37:45] Get people all excited and then kind of throw cold water on it.

[00:37:48] That's not a good strategy.

[00:37:49] In fairness to this defense team, they could have had a much, much better defense.

[00:37:56] That goes without saying.

[00:37:58] But I think even if they'd had a stellar defense, their client would have been convicted.

[00:38:04] Because when you consider the totality of all of the evidence presented at the trial, even before you even get to the confessions, just all of the witnesses and all of that stuff.

[00:38:15] It just put Richard Allen in such a box that even the best attorneys in the world at the top of their game would have had a hard time getting him acquitted.

[00:38:23] I think you're absolutely correct on that, Kevin.

[00:38:27] I think that is something important to note.

[00:38:30] I think when we criticize the defense, having seen the prosecution's case at this point, I don't think they were going to hurdle over that.

[00:38:40] I do think that there was a way to defend him and get closer and perhaps make it a little more close and maybe lose with more dignity, I guess, would be.

[00:38:54] There was certainly ways they could have handled this case without damaging their own reputations and without polluting public discourse and.

[00:39:03] Harming innocent people.

[00:39:05] Yes.

[00:39:05] I want to read the last line from this memorandum.

[00:39:10] Quote, Richard Allen, one, chose not to participate in the pre-sentence process.

[00:39:15] Number two, would not be presenting evidence at the sentencing hearing outside of this memorandum.

[00:39:20] And three, his attorneys will be speaking and articulating arguments in minimal fashion during the sentencing hearing.

[00:39:27] Unquote.

[00:39:27] So basically, as Ani said, at the top of the program, it's like they're taking their ball and going home and not really participating that much in the process, which is understandable to some extent since as they acknowledge their client is going to die in prison.

[00:39:43] But.

[00:39:45] It's not an argument from strength.

[00:39:48] No.

[00:39:49] And this reason is just blustery nonsense.

[00:39:53] Yeah, I guess it's like, you know, it's a situation where I think I was just thinking about what we're talking about with a good defense in this case.

[00:40:00] And to me, I think some people think a good defense is bluster because that's what they see on TV and that's kind of, you know, what you expect and whatnot.

[00:40:09] And for me, a good defense is something that forces the state to prove its case, doesn't let up on any of that, doesn't concede any points on that, points out, you know, every possible error and is factual, is factually based.

[00:40:27] And listen, like, you know, I strongly believe in innocent until proven guilty.

[00:40:32] But I also believe that as a layperson who's not on a jury, you know, we're allowed to criticize what we feel is illogical nonsense.

[00:40:39] And we would be remiss to not do that because if something I feel like insulting to everyone's intelligence, then that is worth pointing out.

[00:40:51] And so, yeah, I think I think this you're absolutely right.

[00:40:56] It's not from strength, but it's not surprising and it's not necessarily based on what Mr.

[00:40:59] Inman told us. Not really that surprising that they wouldn't want him to participate.

[00:41:03] So it may just be a much shorter sentencing hearing than we thought it was going to be.

[00:41:07] Yeah, people will have waited in line 36, 40 hours for a sentencing hearing that may just last an hour or two and have a predetermined conclusion.

[00:41:18] Yeah. Can we talk about that? Because I think people that's something I can see people being confused about.

[00:41:23] You know, is Judge Gull going to get up there tomorrow and sit down and say, OK, wow me.

[00:41:30] I don't know what I'm going to decide yet.

[00:41:33] Or is it pretty much she's looked at everything going in and pretty much knows what she's going to do?

[00:41:38] I don't know what's in the judge's head, but certainly she has had plenty of time to look and consider arguments on both sides.

[00:41:47] Certainly she was present during the entire trial and heard all the evidence we all heard.

[00:41:52] By statute, she has a range of sentences she can give.

[00:41:56] There is a presumptive sentence.

[00:41:58] She can also make that sentence a little bit lighter.

[00:42:01] She can make it heavier.

[00:42:03] She can make the sentences run concurrently or consecutively.

[00:42:07] So she has discretion, but a limited amount of discretion.

[00:42:10] She can't just say death penalty because that was not on the table.

[00:42:12] Yes.

[00:42:13] And she can't just say, well, I don't think it's a big deal.

[00:42:16] So you can just walk.

[00:42:17] There's a minimum.

[00:42:18] There's a range.

[00:42:21] So often I'm sure the judge likely has a pretty good idea of what the sentence might be.

[00:42:30] But with that said, she probably has an open mind in case other evidence comes in during the sentencing hearing, which would make her modify that.

[00:42:38] You mentioned earlier the Kagan-Klein sentencing hearing.

[00:42:41] I recall in that at one point, didn't Judge Spahr go off to think about it and take some time?

[00:42:49] It was actually worse than that.

[00:42:50] So Judge Timothy Spahr in the Kagan-Klein case at one time said, I'm going to consider all this, but I feel like I need to see the CSAM so I can render sentence based on that.

[00:43:01] And he came back and he was like, this guy was so cheerful the whole time despite the horrible topic that we were there for.

[00:43:12] But he was just a very nice judge.

[00:43:14] I remember at one point some person from the audience stood up to ask a question and he did not yell at them.

[00:43:18] He was just really nice about it.

[00:43:20] But then when he came back after that, he was just like ashen faced and like totally like flat affect.

[00:43:25] And it was like obviously affected him really badly.

[00:43:28] But it was like he needed to see that in order to kind of make the final determination on the sentence.

[00:43:34] So it ended up that sentencing hearing ended up taking quite a long time because of that.

[00:43:37] I think it went well into the evening.

[00:43:39] And in this situation, you know, I just want to note that like people sometimes you kind of almost think like, oh, the judge is making all the decision on the fly right now.

[00:43:49] But, you know, she's had access to the PSI.

[00:43:52] She has had access to the law and the statutes and whatnot.

[00:43:56] And she's also had access to, I presume, the victim impact statements and letters that would have been submitted.

[00:44:04] Some people might end up, you know, people in the victim's families might get up to talk tomorrow.

[00:44:10] But others may just file a letter with the judge.

[00:44:14] So it's like we won't necessarily hear everything.

[00:44:18] And frankly, you know, people are asking later to learn more about Alan and his motives.

[00:44:22] It sounds like if he didn't participate in the PSI, the answer would be no.

[00:44:27] Most likely not.

[00:44:28] Yes.

[00:44:29] Because that would have been the chance.

[00:44:30] But the PSI will remain confidential regardless.

[00:44:33] So it's that you could have heard glimmers from it.

[00:44:36] And if someone participates, that might be insightful.

[00:44:38] But in this case, it sounds like no.

[00:44:41] We intend to attend the sentencing hearing.

[00:44:45] We'll have an episode out at some point tomorrow about that.

[00:44:50] I can't sit here and tell you when.

[00:44:51] I don't know how long the sentencing hearing is.

[00:44:54] I don't know.

[00:44:56] Afterwards, we may try to talk to some people who have been previously bound by the gag order.

[00:45:02] To see if they would be interested in coming on the program and talking with all of us about some of their experiences.

[00:45:08] I don't know how long all those things will take.

[00:45:10] So I don't know how long it will be before we can get to our microphones and talk with you all.

[00:45:17] I don't even know if we're going to try to record an episode here in Delphi or go home and record it from there.

[00:45:23] But at some point tomorrow.

[00:45:25] We'll be running around.

[00:45:26] At some point tomorrow prior to midnight, we will have an episode out about the sentencing.

[00:45:32] You just cursed us.

[00:45:34] It might not be a super long episode if the hearing is brief, but we will get something out to you all.

[00:45:39] Yeah.

[00:45:39] And just before we do go, I want to shout out to local businesses.

[00:45:43] If you're in Delphi, you have to go to the Buttermilk Biscuit Company and Coffee Shop.

[00:45:47] We were there today.

[00:45:48] Had a waffle.

[00:45:49] It was excellent.

[00:45:50] Go there.

[00:45:51] We've talked about them before.

[00:45:52] We're obsessed with their biscuits.

[00:45:54] You got to do it.

[00:45:56] And then the other one is actually a business I should have shot it out a long time ago.

[00:46:00] But I just want to say these were like two of the nicest ladies.

[00:46:05] There's a company called Jacobs Redesigned in Delphi.

[00:46:10] And two of the employees there gave us cookies a while ago in trial.

[00:46:13] And I never forgot that.

[00:46:14] That was such a nice, kind act.

[00:46:15] And I don't feel like we ever thanked them, but wanted to say thank you to them as well.

[00:46:20] But, yeah, we'll be here in Delphi and hopefully you'll hear from us tomorrow on the early side.

[00:46:26] Prior to midnight.

[00:46:28] Prior to.

[00:46:28] See, now I'm having visions of us at like 1159.

[00:46:33] Like, you know, we have to fulfill our guarantee.

[00:46:37] But hopefully that won't happen.

[00:46:39] Adia, the trick is you give a deadline far later than what you need.

[00:46:45] And that way you can fulfill it and please people without having to break your back.

[00:46:50] I'm just saying that you may have cursed us because now somehow something is going to go wrong and it's going to go into the late, late night.

[00:46:58] I don't know what's wrong with you.

[00:47:00] That's not going to happen.

[00:47:01] You don't know.

[00:47:02] It's this case.

[00:47:03] We will likely have an episode well before midnight.

[00:47:06] I'm being worst case scenario.

[00:47:07] You'll have something before.

[00:47:08] Well, let's hope so.

[00:47:10] All right.

[00:47:10] Well, thank you guys all so much for listening.

[00:47:12] We really appreciate it.

[00:47:12] And having another peek into Adia's anxious, paranoid mind.

[00:47:16] Oh my God.

[00:47:18] Get us out of here.

[00:47:18] Boo.

[00:47:19] Thanks so much for listening to The Murder Sheet.

[00:47:22] If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email us at murdersheet at gmail dot com.

[00:47:31] If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[00:47:38] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet.

[00:47:49] If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet.

[00:48:00] We very much appreciate any support.

[00:48:03] Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for The Murder Sheet, and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com.

[00:48:13] If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet discussion group on Facebook.

[00:48:21] We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much.

[00:48:27] We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages.

[00:48:33] Thanks again for listening.

[00:48:35] So this holiday season, we want to sincerely thank our latest sponsor, Quince.

[00:48:50] This is a wonderful company that's all about making the finer things in life really accessible for everybody.

[00:48:56] That means Italian leather handbags.

[00:48:59] That means gold jewelry and items.

[00:49:02] But it especially means their wonderful line of Mongolian cashmere products.

[00:49:08] So sweaters, things like that.

[00:49:10] And not just, as you so astutely noted, not just that.

[00:49:14] There are other things they offer.

[00:49:17] Like, you know, for many years, I thought, well, wouldn't it be fun to dress like Colonel Hogan from Hogan's Heroes?

[00:49:24] He always wears this bomber jacket.

[00:49:25] But you go to these stores, you go to these online marketplaces, and these bomber jackets, ridiculously high price because everybody wants to look like Colonel Hogan.

[00:49:34] But Quince offers that at an affordable price.

[00:50:07] Yeah.

[00:50:08] You're just going to look good because he was a charming character.

[00:50:11] He was a charming character.

[00:50:12] And he had a good fashion sense.

[00:50:13] So, I mean, I think you – I'm just fascinated by the way your mind works, I guess.

[00:50:19] But no, I think you look really cute in that bomber jacket.

[00:50:22] I really like it on you.

[00:50:24] I was proud of you for getting it because I think, you know, you kind of – you have your kind of Kevin uniform.

[00:50:29] And this is a bit different.

[00:50:30] But I think it was so nice and at such a good price that you kind of were like, I can't say no to that one.

[00:50:35] So, what TV characters were you trying to emulate with your cashmere sweater?

[00:50:39] None.

[00:50:40] I wasn't trying to emulate anyone.

[00:50:41] But I was – I really like sweaters.

[00:50:45] And so I consider myself – I wouldn't say I'm a sweater connoisseur.

[00:50:48] You know, I've never really had like a cashmere sweater.

[00:50:50] I mean that's something I associate with being like very luxurious, very fancy.

[00:50:54] So, I got two of their sweaters and they are so nice.

[00:50:57] We actually – I wore one when we went to get dinner with our friends the other night.

[00:51:00] Right.

[00:51:01] We – I've kind of worn it a lot ever since.

[00:51:04] They're both really cute.

[00:51:05] And also, you know, one thing with sweaters is sometimes if you're just wearing them and you're not wearing like an undershirt or something, they can kind of get scratchy.

[00:51:12] These ones are so soft.

[00:51:14] They feel so good on your skin.

[00:51:15] There's like no issues with that.

[00:51:17] And they're just very – they just feel a little bit like quiet luxury, a little fancy.

[00:51:23] And that's really nice.

[00:51:24] And I think they – for me, they go with a lot of different things in my wardrobe.

[00:51:28] So it's like I appreciate that they can kind of be like a bit of a staple there for me.

[00:51:33] I'm not – it's like everyone's had a thing where they're like I'm going to wear this all the time and then you don't and like it doesn't go with anything.

[00:51:40] So like what are you doing?

[00:51:40] But these are the opposite of that.

[00:51:42] They kind of go with everything.

[00:51:43] For Murder Sheet listeners, there is a very special deal.

[00:51:46] Gift luxury this holiday season without the luxury price tag.

[00:51:50] Go to quince.com slash msheet for 365-day returns plus free shipping on your order.

[00:51:56] That's Q-U-I-N-C-E dot com slash msheet to get free shipping and 365-day returns.

[00:52:04] Quince.com slash msheet.

[00:52:06] That's a great deal.

[00:52:07] It really is.