The Delphi Murders: The Defense’s Third-Party Memorandum and Judge Frances Gull’s Latest Judgements

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

[00:00:04] [SPEAKER_00]: Immerse yourself in the world of June's Journey,

[00:00:07] [SPEAKER_00]: a free-to-play hidden object game set in the roaring 20s.

[00:00:11] [SPEAKER_00]: Solve the mystery of the devious gossip spreader

[00:00:13] [SPEAKER_00]: and celebrate our seventh anniversary with exclusive events,

[00:00:17] [SPEAKER_00]: never-before-seen decorations, thrilling mysteries, and exciting giveaways.

[00:00:22] [SPEAKER_00]: The adventure and the gossip awaits!

[00:00:25] [SPEAKER_00]: Are you ready for the journey?

[00:00:54] [SPEAKER_00]: Are you ready for the journey?

[00:00:56] [SPEAKER_00]: Download June's Journey today for free on Android or iOS.

[00:01:00] [SPEAKER_02]: Content warning, this episode includes discussion of the murder of two children.

[00:01:05] [SPEAKER_01]: So, today on the Murder Sheet there's been some developments in the Delphi Murders case.

[00:01:12] [SPEAKER_01]: This, of course, is the double homicide of 14-year-old Liberty German and 13-year-old

[00:01:18] [SPEAKER_01]: Abigail Williams in the city of Delphi, Indiana in 2017.

[00:01:24] [SPEAKER_01]: The man accused of murdering these two girls is Richard Allen, and he's currently

[00:01:28] [SPEAKER_01]: in sort of the pretrial phase before an October trial or what will allegedly be an October trial.

[00:01:36] [SPEAKER_01]: So today a couple of things came out, or rather yesterday one thing came out and then two things

[00:01:41] [SPEAKER_01]: followed today as they typically do. So first was the memorandum of law and support of admission

[00:01:46] [SPEAKER_01]: of evidence of alternative theories of the crime and third-party perpetrators,

[00:01:50] [SPEAKER_01]: and then two orders or judgments from Judge Francis Gull. So we're going to talk about all that today.

[00:01:57] [SPEAKER_01]: My name is Ania Kane, I'm a journalist.

[00:02:00] [SPEAKER_02]: And I'm Kevin Greenlee, I'm an attorney.

[00:02:03] [SPEAKER_02]: And this is the Murder Sheet.

[00:02:04] [SPEAKER_02]: We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews,

[00:02:09] [SPEAKER_02]: and deep dives into murder cases.

[00:02:11] [SPEAKER_02]: We're the Murder Sheet.

[00:02:13] [SPEAKER_01]: And this is the Delphi Murders, the defense's third-party memorandum,

[00:02:18] [SPEAKER_01]: and Judge Francis Gull's latest judgments.

[00:03:05] [SPEAKER_02]: So let's talk, let's begin with this third-party memorandum.

[00:03:10] [SPEAKER_02]: First of all, what is that?

[00:03:12] [SPEAKER_02]: So one of the key issues at the hearing there was a few weeks ago involved whether

[00:03:18] [SPEAKER_02]: or not the defense would be allowed to present, would they consider evidence of a

[00:03:24] [SPEAKER_02]: third party being involved in these murders? In other words, they want to present evidence

[00:03:29] [SPEAKER_02]: that someone other than Richard Allen did it.

[00:03:31] [SPEAKER_02]: And they're pointing the finger mainly at a group of so-called odeness,

[00:03:37] [SPEAKER_02]: and they also, while they're at it, they're also pointing fingers at Ron Logan and Kagan Klein.

[00:03:42] [SPEAKER_02]: And so they want to present evidence that those people are responsible for the crime

[00:03:47] [SPEAKER_02]: and that Richard Allen is not.

[00:03:50] [SPEAKER_02]: And in order to be able to do that in court, there has to be some sort of evidence that

[00:03:57] [SPEAKER_02]: those people, they want to point the fingers at actually were involved in the crime.

[00:04:00] [SPEAKER_02]: So what this is, this memorandum, is their arguments for saying here's why we think we

[00:04:07] [SPEAKER_02]: should be allowed to present this in the trial.

[00:04:11] [SPEAKER_02]: And it's important to keep in mind whether this memorandum is not.

[00:04:16] [SPEAKER_02]: The point of this memorandum is not to present new evidence or new revelations.

[00:04:21] [SPEAKER_02]: I saw some people saying this memorandum all just seems to be a rehash of the hearing.

[00:04:26] [SPEAKER_02]: That's kind of what it's designed to be.

[00:04:29] [SPEAKER_02]: The hearing is where they presented their evidence.

[00:04:32] [SPEAKER_02]: And now in this memorandum, they're presenting their argument for why they believe the evidence

[00:04:37] [SPEAKER_02]: they presented warranted this material being presented in the trial.

[00:04:42] [SPEAKER_02]: Does that make sense?

[00:04:43] [SPEAKER_01]: It does. Some may ask why they just didn't present the legal argument in the hearing.

[00:04:48] [SPEAKER_01]: Is there an explanation for that or is this typical you want to do the razzle-dazzle

[00:04:54] [SPEAKER_01]: in the courtroom and then save all the dry legal stuff for later?

[00:04:56] [SPEAKER_02]: I think for one thing, if they went to present arguments to the hearing, we might still be there.

[00:05:00] [SPEAKER_02]: We were there long enough. It was like 12 hours that last day.

[00:05:04] [SPEAKER_01]: Yeah, you know, but I guess they really needed a lot of time for a very weak opening statement

[00:05:08] [SPEAKER_01]: and also Dr. Perlmutter, you know, good use of time.

[00:05:13] [SPEAKER_01]: I'm being sarcastic in case that's not apparent.

[00:05:15] [SPEAKER_01]: Here's the thing. This is very repetitive, but we're going to go over it because

[00:05:21] [SPEAKER_01]: even it feels like sometimes when you don't actually talk about what's going on in the case,

[00:05:27] [SPEAKER_01]: then people sort of start jumping to conclusions.

[00:05:29] [SPEAKER_01]: And I think it's important to kind of say, see what it does say, see what it doesn't say,

[00:05:34] [SPEAKER_01]: see what the arguments are, hear it out and move on from there.

[00:05:39] [SPEAKER_02]: So we're going to go through this as a 27-page memorandum.

[00:05:42] [SPEAKER_02]: We're going to hit the main points, the main highlights.

[00:05:46] [SPEAKER_02]: They've even very helpfully numbered what they think are the key points.

[00:05:50] [SPEAKER_02]: So we will read all of the key points and some of the things we feel are interesting to help

[00:05:55] [SPEAKER_02]: illustrate some of those points and we're going to discuss it.

[00:05:58] [SPEAKER_02]: The first quote I'm going to read is quote one,

[00:06:01] [SPEAKER_02]: and I'm quoting now, quote,

[00:06:04] [SPEAKER_02]: Mr. Allen is entitled to present evidence pursuant to the sixth and 14th

[00:06:09] [SPEAKER_02]: amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 1213 of the Indiana

[00:06:14] [SPEAKER_02]: Constitution that the crime has elements of odinism and ritualistic killings.

[00:06:19] [SPEAKER_01]: Okay, there's an important clause missing from that.

[00:06:22] [SPEAKER_01]: I just want to say has elements of odinism and ritualistic killings,

[00:06:26] [SPEAKER_01]: comma, according to the defense, because I personally, having sat through those three

[00:06:32] [SPEAKER_01]: days of hearings, do not feel that they got even close to that, to presenting concrete,

[00:06:39] [SPEAKER_01]: this is either definitely odinism or even that it's a decent possibility.

[00:06:46] [SPEAKER_01]: In fact, what I saw was that they had two law enforcement officers who ran down that theory,

[00:06:52] [SPEAKER_01]: did a lot of work on that theory and got nowhere with that theory.

[00:06:55] [SPEAKER_01]: And a frankly disastrous expert who they paid and who just happened to come to that conclusion,

[00:07:03] [SPEAKER_01]: aka Dr. Dawn Perlmutter, I think, I know also not just that they paid her, but that she

[00:07:11] [SPEAKER_01]: already came to that conclusion in 2023 on court TV.

[00:07:14] [SPEAKER_01]: So the fact that they're stating that outright, this seems to be part of the defense textbook

[00:07:19] [SPEAKER_01]: where it's like if we state something often enough, then everybody will start going along

[00:07:23] [SPEAKER_01]: with that thinking and I guess nobody's capable of critically assessing our words.

[00:07:31] [SPEAKER_02]: They mentioned some cases, they mentioned a case where they say a suicide note was

[00:07:39] [SPEAKER_02]: not admitted into a murder trial. They say the suicide note was discovered at the crime scene.

[00:07:44] [SPEAKER_02]: That wasn't admitted in the murder trial and they're suggesting that's similar to,

[00:07:51] [SPEAKER_02]: we believe that the sticks in this murder trial are similar to that suicide note because these

[00:07:58] [SPEAKER_02]: sticks present evidence of odinism. And I would suggest it's very different.

[00:08:04] [SPEAKER_02]: In many ways.

[00:08:07] [SPEAKER_02]: I imagine that at the trial there will be a discussion of the crime scene,

[00:08:14] [SPEAKER_02]: including the presence of sticks and it's clear that the defense wants to interpret those sticks

[00:08:22] [SPEAKER_02]: in a certain way but the presence of sticks seems to be far more ambiguous in possible

[00:08:31] [SPEAKER_02]: meetings than the presence of a suicide note.

[00:08:35] [SPEAKER_01]: Also, yeah, I mean because it's all down to interpretation. A suicide note indicates that

[00:08:41] [SPEAKER_01]: a crime perhaps did not occur or at least a homicide did not occur and that in fact what

[00:08:46] [SPEAKER_01]: happened was a suicide. The sticks let's be clear are open to interpretation and actually

[00:08:52] [SPEAKER_01]: were interpreted by the Federal Bureau of Investigations Behavioral Analysis Unit,

[00:08:57] [SPEAKER_01]: aka the BAU, to not be odinism. So it seems that most people in the case, most of the adults

[00:09:05] [SPEAKER_01]: in the room so to speak, indicated at some point that they looked into odinism. It was

[00:09:10] [SPEAKER_01]: seriously considered and then they decided there's nothing there. This appears to be

[00:09:14] [SPEAKER_01]: something else which is how an investigation is supposed to work. You're supposed to follow

[00:09:18] [SPEAKER_01]: the evidence and that essentially the defense is very upset about that outcome but I don't

[00:09:23] [SPEAKER_01]: really feel like they have a lot of qualms about the process here because it was at least considered.

[00:09:28] [SPEAKER_01]: It's totally different than the suicide note. I mean that's just, I don't even know.

[00:09:33] [SPEAKER_02]: I want to read another quote that jumped out at me.

[00:09:37] [SPEAKER_02]: If the prosecution's argument is that Richard Allen acted alone and there are alternative

[00:09:44] [SPEAKER_02]: theories that the murders were committed by more than one person then who are the additional

[00:09:49] [SPEAKER_02]: people involved in killing Abigail Williams and Liberty German? The answer is that there are

[00:09:55] [SPEAKER_02]: third-party suspects who have not been charged and who have no ties to Richard Allen. This leads

[00:10:00] [SPEAKER_02]: to the conclusion that Richard Allen is innocent and that other individuals acting together killed

[00:10:05] [SPEAKER_02]: Abigail Williams and Liberty German end quote. So that seems to be suggesting that if you can

[00:10:11] [SPEAKER_02]: come up with an alternative theory involving multiple people committing this crime then

[00:10:17] [SPEAKER_02]: that in and of itself somehow exonerates Richard Allen. And I suggest what's more important to look at

[00:10:26] [SPEAKER_02]: is if you do come up with an alternative theory, is there any evidence for it?

[00:10:31] [SPEAKER_02]: And let's compare that evidence to the evidence that stacked against Richard Allen.

[00:10:38] [SPEAKER_01]: What do you make of the word salad here? I mean like I'm sorry I'm just like looking at

[00:10:43] [SPEAKER_01]: the word salad. It's word salad with a side of logical leaps. That's what that's what so much of this is.

[00:10:51] [SPEAKER_01]: Yeah. I mean this is like out of sweet green. I mean I'm sorry I don't, I don't know it's like if

[00:11:00] [SPEAKER_01]: we write something in a sort of a legal tone that doesn't necessarily make it a good legal

[00:11:05] [SPEAKER_02]: argument. Yeah I suggest that an alternative theory doesn't mean much unless there is evidence

[00:11:12] [SPEAKER_02]: behind that alternative theory tying alternate parties to the crime. And they were not able to

[00:11:20] [SPEAKER_02]: present any alternative theories with actual evidence behind them at these hearings.

[00:11:24] [SPEAKER_01]: Well I would actually argue that they, they did an okay job with Kagan Klein but for their,

[00:11:30] [SPEAKER_01]: but let's be very clear Kagan Klein and Ron Logan the two other theories they mentioned

[00:11:35] [SPEAKER_01]: here are side dishes. The main course is odinism so the main course went off the rails here. They

[00:11:42] [SPEAKER_01]: got some good points in on Kagan Klein didn't even try with Ron Logan like that was just they just

[00:11:48] [SPEAKER_01]: basically were like let's move along and so when it comes to their main theory that they've been

[00:11:55] [SPEAKER_01]: hammering for months and years I guess at this point it's just they didn't get anywhere.

[00:12:01] [SPEAKER_01]: They didn't, they didn't get anywhere. I would argue that they didn't get close to anything

[00:12:05] [SPEAKER_02]: in terms of bringing in direct evidence. The main thing is I believe we mentioned during our

[00:12:12] [SPEAKER_02]: coverage of those hearings was that at the end of their cross examination of their law enforcement

[00:12:20] [SPEAKER_02]: witnesses Mick McLeanall would ask them were you ever able to come up with evidence

[00:12:26] [SPEAKER_02]: that places these alternative suspects even in the city of Delphi at the time of the murders and the

[00:12:33] [SPEAKER_02]: answer was no. They were unable to tie their suspects to the crime so that's what it boils down to.

[00:12:42] [SPEAKER_01]: Yeah and yeah that's well said I would also say that one thing they would talk about a lot is

[00:12:52] [SPEAKER_01]: you know at times this is something I got from the three days of hearings

[00:12:57] [SPEAKER_01]: some in law enforcement at times believed there was more than one person involved in the crimes

[00:13:02] [SPEAKER_01]: and that largely seemed to stem from sort of early theories early assumptions

[00:13:07] [SPEAKER_01]: and maybe perhaps theories that came up later like Kagan Klein and Tony Klein possibly being

[00:13:13] [SPEAKER_01]: perpetrators so the thing is about this is that law enforcement is allowed to change their minds.

[00:13:21] [SPEAKER_02]: Not only that but I would go so far to say is that what you would want that's what you would want.

[00:13:27] [SPEAKER_02]: You don't want law enforcement to lock onto a theory early on and stick with it regardless of

[00:13:35] [SPEAKER_02]: the evidence. What you want is for law enforcement for investigators to consider a wide variety of

[00:13:41] [SPEAKER_02]: theories pursue them to the best of their abilities and start excluding things and if

[00:13:49] [SPEAKER_02]: they have a favored theory in their mind that then the evidence suggests may not be true you want

[00:13:55] [SPEAKER_02]: them to discard it and move on. You don't want to penalize people for pursuing multiple theories.

[00:14:02] [SPEAKER_01]: I would think that a bunch of defense attorneys would realize that when you essentially have

[00:14:06] [SPEAKER_01]: law enforcement going terminator style at one particular suspect to the you know denigration

[00:14:12] [SPEAKER_01]: of all other possible theories that's how you get wrongful convictions because you have

[00:14:17] [SPEAKER_01]: blinders on and you're basically dismissing everything that doesn't fit your favorite suspect

[00:14:24] [SPEAKER_01]: and that is how innocent people get imprisoned for years and have their lives ruined. So

[00:14:29] [SPEAKER_01]: actually having people who are robustly investigating various theories is not a problem

[00:14:37] [SPEAKER_01]: that's in fact very good. At one time Ron Logan seemed to be a prime suspect in this case

[00:14:44] [SPEAKER_01]: in that they were searching his house, he was getting thrown in jail for a probation violation

[00:14:52] [SPEAKER_01]: and at some point he fell off the radar because there was no evidence. That's appropriate. You don't

[00:14:58] [SPEAKER_01]: want the wrong person going to prison for something like this you want the correct person

[00:15:02] [SPEAKER_01]: and so I guess these arguments on some level failed to compel me on those grounds because

[00:15:09] [SPEAKER_01]: it's just a stupid argument. They should change their minds based on evidence and a man confessing,

[00:15:16] [SPEAKER_01]: placing himself at the crime scene having ballistics evidence linking him that is ultimately

[00:15:22] [SPEAKER_01]: a theory that one could perhaps understand law enforcement finding more compelling than

[00:15:28] [SPEAKER_01]: you know these guys are vaguely creepy and they follow some of them possibly follow a religion

[00:15:33] [SPEAKER_01]: we don't understand although I would argue that it's not even clear to me that Elvis Fields

[00:15:37] [SPEAKER_02]: is an odinous so. And I hasten to add odinism is not a religion most of us follow actually it's

[00:15:47] [SPEAKER_01]: heathenry but odinism is the prison gang version of it. Heathenry is not a religion most of us

[00:15:54] [SPEAKER_02]: follow most of us are not odinous but just because a person is a heathen or an odinous just

[00:16:01] [SPEAKER_01]: because they do let me know that religious your your lesson fall into the defense is trap odinism

[00:16:08] [SPEAKER_01]: is a white nationalist prison gang. They are dangerous and they have the trappings of Heathenry

[00:16:14] [SPEAKER_01]: there they're not good it's not clear that any of these men are actually odinous because

[00:16:17] [SPEAKER_01]: they're not there's no evidence they're part of a prison gang. A satru is the version of

[00:16:23] [SPEAKER_01]: Heathenry that is more white supremacist more exclusive and so I think we can have problems

[00:16:29] [SPEAKER_01]: with that but being part of a religion that perhaps has those elements does not necessarily

[00:16:34] [SPEAKER_02]: make one of them just because you practice rituals that other people might not understand

[00:16:40] [SPEAKER_01]: doesn't mean you're a murderer. Yes and heathens are just people they're just normal people they

[00:16:45] [SPEAKER_01]: worship the the Norse gods and many of them are very inclusive nice they're not they're

[00:16:53] [SPEAKER_01]: not racist we've met heathens there there's no reason for them to be sort of shamed as a group

[00:17:00] [SPEAKER_01]: because of some of these allegations although I feel the defense in the beginning really should

[00:17:05] [SPEAKER_01]: have perhaps set up some definitions themselves and clarified what they were talking about here

[00:17:09] [SPEAKER_01]: and they failed to do so so now you have a situation where it's like everyone even remotely

[00:17:14] [SPEAKER_01]: associated with that form of worship is being tarred with the same brush and that's not fair.

[00:17:19] [SPEAKER_02]: Let's move on and talk about Dr. Poulmander because they discuss her at length in this memo

[00:17:24] [SPEAKER_02]: and this was their expert witness who was completely destroyed by Nick McLean in cross

[00:17:33] [SPEAKER_01]: examination. Yeah and so I'm not the only one who saw that that was devastating right?

[00:17:40] [SPEAKER_01]: Yes I was there you were there I just I was so gosh I thought she was such a bad witness

[00:17:47] [SPEAKER_02]: that I just want to check my own. And even Andrew Baldwin afterwards told prosecutor McLean

[00:17:52] [SPEAKER_01]: that was good across examination. Well done I I oh man I why you would cite her after

[00:18:01] [SPEAKER_01]: witnessing that she left that courtroom with zero credibility. She says there were basically

[00:18:09] [SPEAKER_02]: seven points that suggest to her that these murders were ritual murders let's go through

[00:18:16] [SPEAKER_01]: them one by one. Can we before we go through them one by one just to show how facetious these are

[00:18:21] [SPEAKER_01]: can I just read them quickly like just what they are so people can understand how vague this is.

[00:18:26] [SPEAKER_01]: One outdoor location two important dates three I guess cause of death four knife as a weapon

[00:18:37] [SPEAKER_01]: five symbols of the crime scene six body disposition and seven atypical blood pattern.

[00:18:43] [SPEAKER_01]: Let's go through those one by one place of death. Well the Delphi murders occurred outdoors

[00:18:51] [SPEAKER_02]: in woods near a body of water and so she suggests that anytime a crime or a murder takes place

[00:18:59] [SPEAKER_02]: in the woods near a body of water that suggests irritable homicide or ritual crime I would

[00:19:07] [SPEAKER_02]: respectfully suggest that a number of crimes take place outside and that that doesn't really

[00:19:15] [SPEAKER_02]: suggest much other than a lot of people are victims of opportunity and a number of crimes

[00:19:20] [SPEAKER_02]: that take place outside the perpetrator will try to find a place to commit his misdeeds

[00:19:28] [SPEAKER_02]: whether it's murder or sexual assault in a place where he would not be easily observed

[00:19:35] [SPEAKER_02]: and you're not going to commit a murder or a rape in the middle of an open field with people nearby

[00:19:41] [SPEAKER_02]: you're going to look for a place more isolated like in the woods and body of water it's a classic

[00:19:48] [SPEAKER_02]: psychic thing where psychics will always say oh the person who is missing and who is deceased

[00:19:55] [SPEAKER_02]: oh I think they buy a body of water because it was always a body of water relatively close by

[00:20:00] [SPEAKER_01]: this reminds me of the smiley face killer theory where there is this theory that there is a roving

[00:20:06] [SPEAKER_01]: gang of serial killers going around the country and drowning young men and it's a situation where

[00:20:12] [SPEAKER_01]: one of the facets of the theory is you know at every scene there's a smiley face not too far

[00:20:19] [SPEAKER_01]: away and it's like that is the most one of the most common symbols out there that means

[00:20:26] [SPEAKER_01]: nothing and the very credible alternate theory is that while some of those cases may be indeed

[00:20:32] [SPEAKER_01]: homicides they're not linked and that many of them are actually accidental deaths because sometimes

[00:20:37] [SPEAKER_01]: when people are drinking or doing drugs they can drown and it's not really that hard

[00:20:44] [SPEAKER_01]: and so it's a situation where I feel like this is the kind of logic that gives us some of those

[00:20:50] [SPEAKER_01]: those fallacies and it's just it's not credible it's not if you if you were talking about a ritual

[00:20:55] [SPEAKER_01]: homicide and like there was evidence of like they created an altar here and here are all the carvings

[00:21:01] [SPEAKER_01]: in the trees that are definitely ruins then maybe you have something I'm not saying I'm opposed

[00:21:05] [SPEAKER_01]: the idea that this can happen but I am opposed to the idea of like it's outside therefore

[00:21:09] [SPEAKER_01]: we can't rule out ritual homicide it's like okay her her second point is the date of death

[00:21:17] [SPEAKER_02]: she says that ritual murders and sacrifices often take place on important dates and apparently

[00:21:25] [SPEAKER_02]: according to her February 14th is an important date for people who follow certain types of heathery

[00:21:34] [SPEAKER_02]: but what is worth noting is that all available evidence all available credible evidence

[00:21:40] [SPEAKER_02]: indicates that the girls were killed shortly after they were kidnapped which of course took

[00:21:46] [SPEAKER_02]: place on the afternoon of February 13th a day before the so-called important date so if you're

[00:21:53] [SPEAKER_02]: saying that a crime needs to take place on an important date to be considered a ritual homicide

[00:22:01] [SPEAKER_02]: then there is a strong argument that this is not a ritual homicide since the crime did not

[00:22:06] [SPEAKER_01]: actually take place on that so-called important date well said to give a silly example it's

[00:22:13] [SPEAKER_01]: a bit like saying well we think that Anya probably stole the cereal from the Walmart because it actually

[00:22:20] [SPEAKER_01]: took place near the solemnity of all saints and Anya is in fact a Catholic and and and the question

[00:22:28] [SPEAKER_01]: there is yes but do do Roman Catholics have a history of pulling cereal heists because that

[00:22:34] [SPEAKER_01]: is that somehow like what something more known for is that a facet of our religion or or

[00:22:40] [SPEAKER_01]: of the practice of some criminal element of Catholics like being near some random feast date

[00:22:49] [SPEAKER_01]: if you don't have some they're like oh it's a sacrificial feast what does that mean do heathens

[00:22:54] [SPEAKER_01]: do assortrude do frankly even Odinists have a history of sacrificing people at their feasts

[00:23:02] [SPEAKER_01]: because if they do I certainly haven't heard of that and I would have thought that that would

[00:23:07] [SPEAKER_02]: be brought up by now so to summarize there's no reason to think heathens or Odinists kill people

[00:23:15] [SPEAKER_02]: on certain dates and yeah or if they do there's this wasn't even that date let's move on to point

[00:23:24] [SPEAKER_02]: three cause of death dr. Pormutter testified that ritualistic crimes are often committed by

[00:23:31] [SPEAKER_02]: sharp force injury to the neck and so therefore that these girls suffered neck wounds is an

[00:23:40] [SPEAKER_02]: indication that it was a ritual homicide I suggest that if you are in a panic situation and you want

[00:23:49] [SPEAKER_02]: to quickly commit two murders and you're armed with a sharp weapon such as a box cutter you're

[00:23:55] [SPEAKER_02]: going to go for a vulnerable spot such as the neck yeah there's nothing there's like nothing more

[00:24:01] [SPEAKER_01]: to say about that the weapon this is something that I think McClendon had some some things to say

[00:24:09] [SPEAKER_02]: about in his cross examination dr. Pormutter testified that ritualistic crimes are often

[00:24:14] [SPEAKER_02]: committed with ceremonial knives the weapons used to kill the girls was a knife according

[00:24:20] [SPEAKER_02]: to the defense I think it is worth noting that at no point during the hearings that I recall

[00:24:27] [SPEAKER_02]: incorrect me if I forgot something but at no point in the hearings that I recall did the defense

[00:24:32] [SPEAKER_02]: produce any evidence that the murder weapon was a ceremonial knife and in fact according to one

[00:24:40] [SPEAKER_02]: of the confessions of Richard Allen the weapon was actually a box cutter that's completely correct

[00:24:45] [SPEAKER_01]: and I would add that just as a side note I know people when this first came out were talking about

[00:24:50] [SPEAKER_01]: could a box cutter be used in such a way and I was curious about this too when I looked up

[00:24:58] [SPEAKER_01]: box cutter murders on newspapers.com I did find plenty of examples of box cutters being used to

[00:25:04] [SPEAKER_01]: actually cause neck injuries that led to fatalities so it seems certainly within the

[00:25:12] [SPEAKER_01]: possibility from that perspective but as you said Dr. Pormutter made a big deal on the stand

[00:25:19] [SPEAKER_01]: about ceremonial knives these people have special knives and oh you know like that's a huge deal

[00:25:24] [SPEAKER_01]: is there is there did anyone mention like did any of their suspects mention a ceremonial knife

[00:25:30] [SPEAKER_01]: did is there is there a ceremonial knife that one of them had that went missing afterwards

[00:25:34] [SPEAKER_01]: there was nothing to that effect even close to putting that to be the weapon of choice here

[00:25:41] [SPEAKER_01]: and it sounds like all they mean like all that's really been put out there is that

[00:25:44] [SPEAKER_01]: they know it was some sort of a sharp edged weapon so they're jumping to a conclusion there

[00:25:54] [SPEAKER_02]: why don't you tell us what Dr. Pormutter had to say about symbols at the crime scene

[00:25:58] [SPEAKER_01]: so she mentioned that at the crime scene or what the defense writes here is that

[00:26:04] [SPEAKER_01]: there is what can be interpreted that's a quote there is what can be interpreted

[00:26:08] [SPEAKER_01]: that's that quote that that that phrase is doing a lot of work here

[00:26:13] [SPEAKER_01]: as a specific rune now again the when the BAU looked at this it sounds like they came away

[00:26:20] [SPEAKER_01]: feeling very differently they talk about how FBI Special Agent Nicole Robertson

[00:26:26] [SPEAKER_01]: early on in the case in 2017 you know said that she was looking for runes and symbols

[00:26:32] [SPEAKER_01]: that seems reasonable at the time given that they were looking at all possibilities but

[00:26:36] [SPEAKER_01]: at some point the BAU came back and said this doesn't actually bear the hallmarks so

[00:26:43] [SPEAKER_01]: the defense team at this point seems to be the only one stressing that it must be symbols

[00:26:48] [SPEAKER_01]: being open to the possibility that symbols in the beginning of this case is just prudent

[00:26:54] [SPEAKER_01]: policing that's you know that's that's good that's a good investigation where you're open

[00:26:57] [SPEAKER_01]: minded but as far as this kind of like it must be our way or the highway I think that's just

[00:27:04] [SPEAKER_02]: that doesn't really hold water what did Dr. Pruittman have to say about body dispositions this seems

[00:27:10] [SPEAKER_01]: to be about the positioning of the two bodies she talks about how sacrificed victims are posed and

[00:27:18] [SPEAKER_01]: well that doesn't necessarily that's not even really born out by the crime scene we heard from

[00:27:23] [SPEAKER_01]: Major Pat Cicero the blood expert for the prosecution talked about how Abby was either

[00:27:31] [SPEAKER_01]: not moved or only moved very minorly like perhaps like positioned the head to maybe my assumption

[00:27:37] [SPEAKER_01]: was perhaps check if she was still alive and and not posed and that Libby based on her position

[00:27:45] [SPEAKER_01]: it was was perhaps dragged a short way this is not the elaborate posing and staging that

[00:27:51] [SPEAKER_01]: Pearl Mudder seems to be indicating happened here this is this is something that does not

[00:27:57] [SPEAKER_01]: necessarily point to anything other than minor movements for Libby so I don't I don't know why

[00:28:06] [SPEAKER_01]: it's just like a bad faith interpretation of what's actually there and her final point is

[00:28:12] [SPEAKER_01]: a typical blood pattern yeah this is kind of a vaguely alluded to point here but she says

[00:28:17] [SPEAKER_01]: there's an atypical blood pattern on Libby's face that's quite vague it's not really clear

[00:28:22] [SPEAKER_01]: she you know their claim is that oh Major Cicero also agreed with us but I'm you know it's

[00:28:29] [SPEAKER_01]: I think it's just important to note that all of these factors are incredibly vague

[00:28:37] [SPEAKER_01]: and I believe you could probably conjure up in your own mind in your own imagination because

[00:28:41] [SPEAKER_01]: you guys are smart listeners and you've you've probably actually followed a lot of different

[00:28:45] [SPEAKER_01]: crimes I am very certain that you could conjure up in your own mind something that at least

[00:28:50] [SPEAKER_01]: vaguely fits all of these seven checkmarks and is still not a ritual homicide yeah I agree completely

[00:29:01] [SPEAKER_01]: ready to move on from Dr. Cormoran brother I'm so ready don't you feel like in some ways we're

[00:29:07] [SPEAKER_01]: still stuck in that courtroom don't you feel like we never left in some ways I'm going to quote from

[00:29:14] [SPEAKER_02]: this document point two quote the sixth and 14th amendments the United States Constitution in

[00:29:21] [SPEAKER_02]: article one section 13 of the Indiana Constitution protect Mr. Allen's right to challenge the manner

[00:29:28] [SPEAKER_02]: quality and thoroughness of the investigation to inquire about law enforcement's failure to consider

[00:29:33] [SPEAKER_02]: third-party suspects and to present evidence of a biased exam present evidence of a biased

[00:29:40] [SPEAKER_02]: investigation in quote I think frankly based on what I heard at the hearing

[00:29:46] [SPEAKER_02]: there was actually a real effort by law enforcement to thoroughly investigate these

[00:29:55] [SPEAKER_02]: third-party suspects these these investigators got on the stand and talked at length about

[00:30:02] [SPEAKER_02]: their investigations of third-party suspects and they even testified that they were

[00:30:07] [SPEAKER_02]: encouraged by the prosecutor to look at these other suspects so I didn't really see any

[00:30:15] [SPEAKER_02]: evidence of a failure to properly investigate Odinism did you no I did not in fact I was actually

[00:30:21] [SPEAKER_01]: surprised in a lot of these filings there seems to be kind of a us versus them attitude about like

[00:30:26] [SPEAKER_01]: unified command versus ferrancy click and murphy and it's like one thing I was really surprised by

[00:30:33] [SPEAKER_01]: of course ferrancy click and murphy being Greg ferrancy Kevin murphy and Todd click who are

[00:30:37] [SPEAKER_01]: the primary investigators of the Odinism theory although not the only ones because what we

[00:30:42] [SPEAKER_01]: found out is that at one point lieutenant Jerry Holman actually accompanied Kevin murphy to interview

[00:30:49] [SPEAKER_01]: one of these suspects so it's not a situation where unified command is sitting off to the side and

[00:30:53] [SPEAKER_01]: being like you know let's sabotage this Odinist theory they're actually working with them and

[00:30:58] [SPEAKER_01]: scrutinizing these different things hearing it out and I think what we learned at this hearing

[00:31:03] [SPEAKER_01]: these hearings more than anything is that while is that the process actually was appropriate here

[00:31:09] [SPEAKER_01]: they gave this space they gave it resources they gave a time energy and what the defense seems to

[00:31:15] [SPEAKER_01]: be really quibbling over is the outcome that they didn't find any evidence proving that they did it

[00:31:19] [SPEAKER_01]: and that that's not it's not how this works it's not it's not order up give us the suspect we

[00:31:25] [SPEAKER_01]: want instead of our client I mean that's just stupid yeah it was thoroughly investigated

[00:31:33] [SPEAKER_02]: I was I was watching to see if there was any evidence that this particular lead was abandoned

[00:31:42] [SPEAKER_02]: or not thoroughly investigated and I didn't see any and in fact it became pretty clear that it was

[00:31:50] [SPEAKER_02]: investigated very well and even these investigators admit they weren't able to bring it home and

[00:31:58] [SPEAKER_01]: make that connection and listen if click and murphy feel like well we still kind of think

[00:32:02] [SPEAKER_01]: or we still have questions I mean I understand that they dedicated a lot of time and energy to

[00:32:06] [SPEAKER_01]: this it's it's it's perhaps natural human nature to be perhaps most interested in what you were

[00:32:13] [SPEAKER_01]: doing the most of at the time but I think we can say that that's understandable and we can also

[00:32:20] [SPEAKER_01]: say that it's also very understandable the law enforcement would ultimately opt to go with

[00:32:25] [SPEAKER_01]: Richard Allen because the evidence was there they could get to probable cause and since then

[00:32:32] [SPEAKER_01]: he's been confessing incessantly and perhaps even Richard Allen has Richard Allen has and

[00:32:38] [SPEAKER_01]: even doing things like perhaps including details of the crimes in his confession so

[00:32:44] [SPEAKER_01]: I think they probably made a reasonable call there because had they arrested these

[00:32:49] [SPEAKER_01]: odinists and rounded them all up it seems like it seems like all there was to that we already

[00:32:57] [SPEAKER_01]: know now and frankly it's not enough it's not anywhere near enough to put together a case against

[00:33:03] [SPEAKER_02]: these men I wanted to read something just a phrase from this section and that is this quote

[00:33:14] [SPEAKER_02]: the failure to perform an extraction of Brad Holder's phone in quote so that is an acknowledgement

[00:33:21] [SPEAKER_02]: by the defense that no extraction was done on Brad Holder's phone and that is significant because

[00:33:28] [SPEAKER_02]: one thing they complained incessantly about was that they never received an extraction from Brad

[00:33:35] [SPEAKER_02]: Holder's phone and they were suggesting that this extract this extraction was in fact done

[00:33:42] [SPEAKER_02]: and was being intentionally withheld from them and they indicated that they believe that this was

[00:33:48] [SPEAKER_02]: a sign of bad faith actions on the part of prosecution and law enforcement so I was

[00:33:54] [SPEAKER_02]: interested to see that in this document they acknowledged at last that they were wrong

[00:34:00] [SPEAKER_02]: to make that assertion and that they now accept that no such extraction was done and so that

[00:34:09] [SPEAKER_02]: in other words the prosecution and law enforcement did not commit any misdeeds in withholding from

[00:34:15] [SPEAKER_01]: defense something that never in fact existed can you explain to our audience just for anyone who's

[00:34:21] [SPEAKER_01]: like well what's the difference I mean if they lost it they lost it if they you know hid it that's

[00:34:26] [SPEAKER_01]: also depriving the the defense of this why is it important whether or not it was recorded and

[00:34:34] [SPEAKER_01]: whether or not it was actually hidden by law enforcement why is that very crucial distinction

[00:34:38] [SPEAKER_02]: talking about the extraction yes if they didn't do it they can't turn over something

[00:34:44] [SPEAKER_02]: that they never did they can't turn over evidence which does not exist on the other hand if they

[00:34:50] [SPEAKER_02]: did do this phone extraction and intentionally withheld it from law enforcement that would be

[00:34:57] [SPEAKER_02]: bad you're supposed to share such information with the defense but you can't share with the

[00:35:03] [SPEAKER_02]: defense something that does not exist and the defense is acknowledging that this phone extraction

[00:35:09] [SPEAKER_01]: of Brad Holder does not exist so it's a difference between the defense being able to say you should

[00:35:16] [SPEAKER_01]: have recorded this that was a bad mistake versus the law enforcement is corrupt and

[00:35:21] [SPEAKER_01]: hiding things and committing flagrant discovery violations that could ultimately result in

[00:35:27] [SPEAKER_01]: the case being deeply damaged there's a huge difference here and yeah I was surprised to

[00:35:32] [SPEAKER_01]: see that they admitted that too I wonder what changed their minds honestly or maybe not change

[00:35:38] [SPEAKER_01]: their minds I wonder why they're singing a different tune now and what's interesting if you if you follow

[00:35:44] [SPEAKER_02]: criminal trials defense attorneys always always always try to find things to nitpick

[00:35:51] [SPEAKER_02]: the law enforcement has done they always suggest law enforcement is a main mistake so law

[00:35:55] [SPEAKER_02]: enforcement should have done this or their jobs that's their jobs so that's not unexpected

[00:36:01] [SPEAKER_02]: for them to go through and second guess what choices law enforcement may or may not have made about

[00:36:07] [SPEAKER_02]: doing this or that but it is a bit more unusual to see them go to the lengths that these defense

[00:36:12] [SPEAKER_02]: attorneys have done to suggest active malfeasance well I think it's also a bad strategy frankly

[00:36:18] [SPEAKER_01]: unless you have something I mean listen if you have something as a defense attorney that

[00:36:23] [SPEAKER_01]: proves malfeasance great you know then then absolutely argue that but if it's just this

[00:36:28] [SPEAKER_01]: vague hand waving I think it's a lot easier for people to comprehend impossibly prospective jurors

[00:36:35] [SPEAKER_01]: to comprehend the law enforcement is made of a flawed human beings who make mistakes that could

[00:36:41] [SPEAKER_01]: be detrimental to a case I think that is an easier sell for most people than there is a

[00:36:48] [SPEAKER_01]: full-blown conspiracy to railroad Richard Allen that's a harder argument because you almost have

[00:36:55] [SPEAKER_02]: to build a case yourself and what you say what you say about law enforcement people being flawed

[00:37:01] [SPEAKER_02]: human beings we're all flawed human beings so anything done by a group of human beings has flaws

[00:37:07] [SPEAKER_02]: in them so any criminal investigation has flaws has mistakes just as any criminal defense has

[00:37:14] [SPEAKER_02]: flaws and mistakes and so absolutely it's right for defense attorneys to highlight those yeah

[00:37:20] [SPEAKER_01]: that's their job that's what their their job is to essentially push back against the state force

[00:37:26] [SPEAKER_01]: them to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt I mean that's that's expected I just think it's a

[00:37:31] [SPEAKER_01]: bad strategy and some sort of feels at a certain point it feels like it's in bad faith to be kind

[00:37:36] [SPEAKER_01]: of going with this more conspiratorial angle because again it kind of forces them to prove

[00:37:41] [SPEAKER_01]: something more than just it would be very simple to say here's a mistake here's a mistake here's

[00:37:46] [SPEAKER_01]: a mistake can we really be sure that Richard Allen's arrest wasn't a mistake like that that's

[00:37:51] [SPEAKER_01]: reasonable but they don't seem to ever do the kind of reasonable thing they seem to typically do the

[00:37:59] [SPEAKER_01]: flashy thing that gets a lot of media attention and a lot of you know wild speculation online

[00:38:05] [SPEAKER_01]: and I just I think that's not great for their client to be honest I'm going to move on to

[00:38:12] [SPEAKER_02]: point three quote the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution in article one section 12 and

[00:38:18] [SPEAKER_02]: 13 of the Indiana Constitution protect Richard Allen's right to present evidence to someone

[00:38:23] [SPEAKER_02]: else committed the crime in quote in this section they've been trying to argue that the standard

[00:38:29] [SPEAKER_02]: as to whether or not they should be allowed to present some of this evidence is lower than what

[00:38:35] [SPEAKER_02]: the prosecution thinks it is and then they go on to discuss the specific bits of evidence they have

[00:38:43] [SPEAKER_02]: against a few people you want to discuss what they have on Brad Holder absolutely so on Brad Holder

[00:38:49] [SPEAKER_01]: I kind of made a bulleted list some of them are bulleted or bullets from them and then others

[00:38:53] [SPEAKER_01]: I just kind of added to based on the other parts of the section but one he didn't immediately

[00:38:59] [SPEAKER_01]: remember meeting Abigail Williams two his son Logan is supposedly Abby's boyfriend at the time

[00:39:05] [SPEAKER_01]: three liked runes and his wife for his wife claimed that he told her while drinking that

[00:39:12] [SPEAKER_01]: Patrick Westfall did the murders and so that's it that's it right yeah these are good these are

[00:39:21] [SPEAKER_02]: criminal defense attorneys and imagine how they would react if they were assigned to defend

[00:39:28] [SPEAKER_02]: someone who was facing charges based on that kind of evidence that would be a railroading that

[00:39:34] [SPEAKER_01]: would actually be a railroading if somebody was charged based on what they're claiming about any of

[00:39:39] [SPEAKER_01]: these men that would be a miscarriage of justice that that even went that far to charges I'm talking

[00:39:47] [SPEAKER_01]: about charges I don't even mean trial I mean arrested and charged that's outrageous that's

[00:39:52] [SPEAKER_02]: outrageously weak yeah and they are publicly accusing this man of murder based on this

[00:39:59] [SPEAKER_01]: this little evidence and to be clear if you're wondering well does Brad Holder and these others

[00:40:05] [SPEAKER_01]: men have any recourse as of right now no because this is all in a court filing so these they can't

[00:40:11] [SPEAKER_01]: be sued for libel for any of this if they go out and state it on tv later on that's a different

[00:40:18] [SPEAKER_01]: story maybe wasn't that what happened with uh alger his but but this is a matter at this

[00:40:24] [SPEAKER_01]: point where you know if you're wondering well why don't they you know or if they if they

[00:40:28] [SPEAKER_01]: were afraid of getting sued then they must have some evidence no this is this all a freebie for them

[00:40:34] [SPEAKER_02]: and then they say of course Brad Holder has an alibi for the time that the prosecution says the

[00:40:40] [SPEAKER_02]: murders were committed but they suggest in essence that alibi doesn't count because they

[00:40:46] [SPEAKER_02]: they put a lot of credence on their theory that uh Libby's phone was turned on at 4 33 am

[00:40:56] [SPEAKER_02]: and they take it to me that the murders actually happened I guess somewhere around that time

[00:41:01] [SPEAKER_02]: that the girls were apparently kidnapped and transported via car to another location and then

[00:41:10] [SPEAKER_02]: returned to the where they were discovered even though there was a search going on in the area

[00:41:16] [SPEAKER_02]: they were I don't understand the theory but that is their theory that the crime was actually

[00:41:21] [SPEAKER_02]: took place at a much later time than when all evidence suggests it took place and they base

[00:41:29] [SPEAKER_02]: all of that um their idea that the phone may have been turned on at 4 33 am I think they're just

[00:41:34] [SPEAKER_01]: desperately swerving to avoid Holder's alibi which is that he was at work and then the gym

[00:41:39] [SPEAKER_01]: so they either need to put his id cards and his you know punch card in someone else's hands

[00:41:46] [SPEAKER_01]: at the time which they obviously can't do because they have not presented any evidence about that

[00:41:53] [SPEAKER_01]: or they need to completely move the time of the murder so he's still available it's pretty I just

[00:42:01] [SPEAKER_01]: it's just sloppy I'm sorry what do they have on Patrick Westfall's well they've got he

[00:42:09] [SPEAKER_01]: served in the military with Holder he was in us into a sawtru again I just want to say again

[00:42:18] [SPEAKER_01]: that they they use these terms interchangeably he then a sawtru odinism I've described earlier

[00:42:24] [SPEAKER_01]: that they're different things but that's important to remember they also say that Westfall told

[00:42:29] [SPEAKER_01]: police that he won't sacrifice the chicken yes and they also repeat the claim that the blood

[00:42:35] [SPEAKER_01]: on the tree that a crime scene photo leaked of onto the internet is a rune

[00:42:43] [SPEAKER_01]: Matt Major Patrick Cicero stated otherwise he said that he testified that he believed that

[00:42:49] [SPEAKER_01]: based on how hard it is to paint something in blood on a tree like that he believes it was libyz

[00:42:56] [SPEAKER_01]: from an imprint from Libby's hand as she clutched the tree for support after her throat

[00:43:00] [SPEAKER_01]: had been cut so that's what that's what the prosecution is saying and and these guys are

[00:43:06] [SPEAKER_02]: still claiming that this must be a rune and he must be guilty because he won't sacrifice to chicken

[00:43:12] [SPEAKER_02]: again this is very very weak evidence what do they have on Elvis fields

[00:43:19] [SPEAKER_01]: the thing they repeat here that just sends me into a spiral is this idea that Elvis fields

[00:43:26] [SPEAKER_01]: was mimicking holders facebook page that's what Kevin Murphy claimed that's what the defense claims

[00:43:32] [SPEAKER_01]: that is consistently treated as a given I don't believe it's a given I strongly I'm not saying

[00:43:39] [SPEAKER_01]: it's impossible but I think treating it like it's a given without actually backing it up and just

[00:43:43] [SPEAKER_01]: hand waving it away as it's all similar they say they had similar posts many of this stuff was

[00:43:48] [SPEAKER_01]: completely generic we did an episode about this with an excellent researcher named Thomas

[00:43:52] [SPEAKER_01]: he pointed out all this stuff we looked at it we all had open minds about it we were willing to say

[00:43:57] [SPEAKER_01]: okay this is this could be connected and at the end of the day it was a bunch of generic stuff

[00:44:02] [SPEAKER_01]: they they need they need a lot more and they they say well Elvis fields said he knew breadholder

[00:44:08] [SPEAKER_01]: given that Elvis fields was set in court to have possibly the mental capacity of a child

[00:44:13] [SPEAKER_01]: it seems like I would need a transcript of what exactly he claimed or some evidence for an

[00:44:19] [SPEAKER_01]: actual connection more so than what they're giving Elvis fields also I've not seen anything to indicate

[00:44:27] [SPEAKER_01]: that he must be a notanist or a even a heathen so I they need him for this theory they need him for

[00:44:36] [SPEAKER_01]: this link this rushful link but I don't know then the big thing that I think was very

[00:44:42] [SPEAKER_01]: reasonable for them to look into was Elvis fields questioned whether or not if he spit on the girls

[00:44:50] [SPEAKER_01]: or there's you know spit it has spit at the crime scene on the on the girls bodies would

[00:44:56] [SPEAKER_01]: would he be in trouble if he could explain it away yeah that's a very that's a that's a question

[00:45:01] [SPEAKER_01]: that you definitely want to follow up on so I completely understand why they were looking into

[00:45:04] [SPEAKER_02]: that but it's worth noting that he asked this question right after he gave a sample of spit

[00:45:11] [SPEAKER_02]: the spit sample of spit so that makes the question a bit more understandable and also I don't believe

[00:45:16] [SPEAKER_02]: there's ever been any indication that was saliva found on the bodies of the girls neither that nor

[00:45:21] [SPEAKER_01]: any indication I mean what the defense could say as well here's an instance where they didn't

[00:45:25] [SPEAKER_01]: collect it properly or you know here's evidence that it was scrubbed away but we're not we

[00:45:31] [SPEAKER_01]: don't see anything like that what do they have on Johnny Messer I'll just say this Murphy also

[00:45:34] [SPEAKER_01]: thought that Elvis fields was messing with him at the time that was his initial reaction

[00:45:38] [SPEAKER_01]: Johnny Messer there's a photo of Messer with Holder in Westfall and he also knew fields so he's the

[00:45:45] [SPEAKER_01]: kind of link between rushville and the Delphi Logan sport area uh this is in my opinion a significantly

[00:45:51] [SPEAKER_01]: better link than the facebook stuff but it also does not prove that you know I have friends who've

[00:45:57] [SPEAKER_01]: never met each other like it's not like you know I mean like I whatever they also talk about how

[00:46:03] [SPEAKER_01]: Messer was a Vinlanders recruiters and that he kind of hid that from police frankly given that the

[00:46:08] [SPEAKER_01]: Vinlanders are a skinhead group I don't find that particularly surprising they then move on to Kagan

[00:46:16] [SPEAKER_01]: and Tony Klein now this is interesting because I think you and I were pretty intrigued by some

[00:46:21] [SPEAKER_01]: of the Kagan and Tony Klein elements at the three-day hearing they went really hard against

[00:46:26] [SPEAKER_01]: the clients the defense seemed to be very much like well maybe the clients did it which is

[00:46:30] [SPEAKER_01]: a surprising because they've been very quiet about the clients for so long so we thought maybe is that

[00:46:35] [SPEAKER_01]: their backup if odinism gets thrown out which it seems like it very well may have since it

[00:46:41] [SPEAKER_01]: it it there's nothing to it at the end of the day when we're talking about like

[00:46:45] [SPEAKER_01]: should it be allowed in court the answer seems to be resounding no but maybe the clients could

[00:46:52] [SPEAKER_01]: achieve that you know distinction where they could actually there's enough there and I think

[00:46:58] [SPEAKER_01]: that's a fair argument but there was only like one paragraph in this filing about the clients so I

[00:47:04] [SPEAKER_02]: don't know maybe maybe we got the wrong idea I think whether or not a person believes that the

[00:47:10] [SPEAKER_02]: clients were involved in this crime you can make an argument that they rise to the level of being

[00:47:19] [SPEAKER_02]: eligible to be mentioned in the trial I want to quote the last line from their paragraph on

[00:47:25] [SPEAKER_02]: the clients quote all of his evidence creates an inference that Kagan Klein and Jerry Anthony

[00:47:30] [SPEAKER_02]: Klein murdered Abigail Williams and Libby German in quote and again Jerry Anthony Klein is Tony Klein

[00:47:38] [SPEAKER_01]: yeah that was a very surreal moment in trial when Judge Gull at the I'm sorry not trial at

[00:47:44] [SPEAKER_01]: the pre-trial hearing thank you uh where Judge Gull was like but who's Jerry Klein and they were

[00:47:50] [SPEAKER_01]: like oh Jerry Anthony Klein she's like but then who's Tony Klein and like I felt like this went on

[00:47:55] [SPEAKER_01]: for like I mean my sense of time was really warped but it felt like it went it felt like a bad

[00:48:00] [SPEAKER_01]: vaudeville routine people trying to figure out the names but that is yeah I mean I don't know

[00:48:07] [SPEAKER_01]: were you surprised that there was so little of that in here or do you think that doesn't

[00:48:10] [SPEAKER_02]: really mean anything I think the amount of space devoted to the clients in this document

[00:48:18] [SPEAKER_02]: is similar proportionately to the amount of time they spent on it in the hearing that is fair

[00:48:23] [SPEAKER_01]: that is fair that is fair yes it just seemed more comprehensive at the hearing because it was just

[00:48:30] [SPEAKER_02]: a different setting Ron Logan they're talking about Ron Logan in this document where they have

[00:48:35] [SPEAKER_01]: a run long they claim that Ron Logan's voice is consistent with that the voice of the audio

[00:48:40] [SPEAKER_01]: of the of the perpetrator saying down the hill first of all having listened to interviews with him on

[00:48:48] [SPEAKER_01]: tv I disagree and I would not be if they were listen I'm gonna tell you I don't think that

[00:48:56] [SPEAKER_01]: there's going to be a factor a trial where the the vocals are important where the down the hill

[00:49:02] [SPEAKER_01]: is is important that's my opinion I just say that because that down the hill or guys down

[00:49:09] [SPEAKER_01]: the hill is far too few words for a reasonable comparison and I'm not really entirely sure what

[00:49:15] [SPEAKER_01]: the science is behind vocal comparisons you know I I just don't think it's going to be a big factor

[00:49:20] [SPEAKER_01]: either way but just when we're talking about this casually given what I've heard from the

[00:49:26] [SPEAKER_01]: social media posts that were previously on Kathy Allen's Facebook that contained Richard

[00:49:30] [SPEAKER_01]: Allen's voice I would really not be comparing other people's voices to bridge guy because I can

[00:49:36] [SPEAKER_01]: tell you who sounds a lot more like bridge guy it's not Ron Logan it is Richard Allen so

[00:49:43] [SPEAKER_01]: that's baffling to me and uh that's yeah there's not much about Ron Logan either

[00:49:49] [SPEAKER_02]: I'm gonna move on to point three quote Richard Allen has a right to introduce

[00:49:54] [SPEAKER_02]: evidence of motive as it is always relevant in quote can you elaborate well I mean

[00:50:03] [SPEAKER_01]: they're saying that quote in this case the prosecution is no proof of any connection

[00:50:10] [SPEAKER_01]: of Mr. Allen to Abigail Williams or Liberty German nor have they identified any motive

[00:50:14] [SPEAKER_01]: as to why Mr. Allen would kill them end quote now that's interesting the state I mean in these

[00:50:20] [SPEAKER_01]: hearings the state does not have to explicitly spell out their motive or their case they gave

[00:50:25] [SPEAKER_01]: us a sort of an initial sample of their case but it's not they weren't asking for most of

[00:50:31] [SPEAKER_01]: this stuff so I mean that's not something we would expect but at one point McLean did strongly

[00:50:38] [SPEAKER_01]: allude to a belief in a sexual motive essentially saying that you know in a hypothetical is it

[00:50:47] [SPEAKER_01]: possible that a crime could start off with a sexual intent and then not result in an actual

[00:50:53] [SPEAKER_01]: sexual crime occurring in other words if a rapist kills a victim before raping them

[00:51:02] [SPEAKER_01]: is does that mean it wasn't a sexually motivated crime I think everyone would argue obviously

[00:51:07] [SPEAKER_01]: it's a sexually motivated murder in that situation even if the rape did not occur so

[00:51:14] [SPEAKER_01]: if it's a sexual motive the perpetrator doesn't need a connection to the victims

[00:51:20] [SPEAKER_01]: women and girls and men and boys can be attacked by

[00:51:26] [SPEAKER_01]: perpetrators that they don't know a stranger attack so it you know they kind of

[00:51:33] [SPEAKER_01]: they think they're making a big point here I just don't you know it I don't get it as far as the

[00:51:39] [SPEAKER_01]: other theory here when it comes to Kagan and Tony Klein I imagine that that motive

[00:51:47] [SPEAKER_01]: hypothetically would be sexual as well on some level given Kagan's activities online

[00:51:52] [SPEAKER_01]: and then for the Odinists I mean what's been alluded to so far is that this was some sort of ritual

[00:51:58] [SPEAKER_01]: sacrifice but I think when you have a situation where two teenage girls are being undressed and

[00:52:08] [SPEAKER_01]: one of them is left naked then you have to at least be strongly looking at a sexual crime

[00:52:17] [SPEAKER_01]: absolutely and a sexual assault or a sexual assault that is has evidence left over afterwards

[00:52:23] [SPEAKER_01]: is is not is not the end all be all of whether it's sexually motivated I think that about

[00:52:31] [SPEAKER_02]: doesn't for this document you want to quickly discuss the facts that judge goal just before

[00:52:37] [SPEAKER_02]: we started recording she issued a couple of orders yes so we actually have heard back from her

[00:52:44] [SPEAKER_01]: still waiting to see whether or not Odinism is allowed in a trial that's a sort of big thing that

[00:52:50] [SPEAKER_01]: is remaining but as far as other orders they have come down so the first one is the defense

[00:53:00] [SPEAKER_02]: team had a motion before the judge to compel emotions for sanctions this is one of the

[00:53:06] [SPEAKER_02]: things discussed at the hearing basically the defense was claiming the prosecution wasn't doing

[00:53:12] [SPEAKER_02]: discovery properly and because of that they wanted some pretty significant sanctions including

[00:53:18] [SPEAKER_02]: Odinism could be allowed in and the state couldn't refute it and I believe they didn't

[00:53:24] [SPEAKER_02]: want anything from Libby's phone to be admitted and this is not particularly surprising news

[00:53:29] [SPEAKER_01]: but judge goal denied that motion this is a situation where I just want to be clear

[00:53:34] [SPEAKER_01]: that after a break McLean was able to along with detective David Vito pull up a bunch of receipts

[00:53:43] [SPEAKER_01]: literally where the defense had signed for evidence and then was acting like they hadn't

[00:53:47] [SPEAKER_01]: gotten it in a timely fashion from the prosecution so that was embarrassing and I'm surprised that

[00:53:57] [SPEAKER_01]: I mean like they wouldn't check that I guess now it's now you mentioned uh there's an element in

[00:54:05] [SPEAKER_01]: here about Sergeant Cecil commander Cecil Christopher Cecil did I mention that no I don't think you

[00:54:11] [SPEAKER_01]: did so I'm going to mention that so there's uh in here it says the court will order the state

[00:54:17] [SPEAKER_01]: to turn over Cecil's report within 10 days of this order so that refers to he is um a commander

[00:54:23] [SPEAKER_01]: with ICAC aka Indiana crimes against children internet crimes against children and his report

[00:54:30] [SPEAKER_02]: basically deals with the phone and I believe that report will probably contain some information

[00:54:36] [SPEAKER_02]: about this allegedly mysterious 433 a.m. incident where they claim that the phone was turned on

[00:54:42] [SPEAKER_02]: I think the answers were probably lie in Cecil's report and you may be wondering well why hadn't

[00:54:47] [SPEAKER_01]: he given over that report earlier isn't that evidence of a of a discovery violation

[00:54:52] [SPEAKER_01]: and software for some of these programs that dig into phones that police use update over time

[00:54:59] [SPEAKER_01]: and new programs come out and the technology is constantly improving so he ran what we made

[00:55:06] [SPEAKER_01]: to understand in court is that he ran Libby's phone through another one of these apps or another

[00:55:11] [SPEAKER_01]: one of these sort of updates and it takes time to go through that and to make a report so

[00:55:17] [SPEAKER_01]: he's going to be turning that over to the defense and the prosecution soon

[00:55:20] [SPEAKER_01]: and what what is notable here is that uh Gullo's ordering that that come in within 10 days of this

[00:55:27] [SPEAKER_01]: order and any new discovery provided within seven days of receipt that is something that

[00:55:32] [SPEAKER_01]: McLean readily agreed to based on within within court so that's that's not an objection from

[00:55:38] [SPEAKER_01]: McLean he's saying sure we can do that there's no problem now I want to read in its entirety

[00:55:42] [SPEAKER_02]: the second order she issued today her decision is not the least bit shocking but I think some of

[00:55:51] [SPEAKER_02]: the things she says in here might offer some hints as to how she might rule in some of these other

[00:55:57] [SPEAKER_02]: things that are still open so this is uh the order uh issued today from Judge Fran Gullo I'm

[00:56:04] [SPEAKER_02]: quoting quote the court having had the defendant's second motion to dismiss based upon newly

[00:56:10] [SPEAKER_02]: discovered destroyed and or missing exculpatory or potentially useful evidence under advisement

[00:56:17] [SPEAKER_02]: following a hearing conducted on July 30th 2024 and having reviewed the exhibit submitted and the

[00:56:23] [SPEAKER_02]: arguments of counsel now finds that the law is against the defendant no evidence has been

[00:56:29] [SPEAKER_02]: presented to the court that the state destroyed exculpatory evidence nor the state acted in

[00:56:35] [SPEAKER_02]: faith the defense argues this alleged exculpatory evidence all relates to one person

[00:56:41] [SPEAKER_02]: Brad Holder however no evidence has been presented to support this argument nor has any evidence

[00:56:49] [SPEAKER_02]: been presented to negate the evidence offered by the state which cleared Brad Holder of

[00:56:54] [SPEAKER_02]: involvement in these crimes defendant second motion to dismiss is therefore denied as

[00:56:59] [SPEAKER_02]: unsupported by the law and the evidence in quote so she's making a crystal clear there

[00:57:05] [SPEAKER_02]: that she does not believe that there is any evidence time holder to these crimes

[00:57:11] [SPEAKER_01]: that that is completely fair I don't know what else to say like I do yes that's based on what

[00:57:19] [SPEAKER_01]: we saw in those three days I was shocked by how little they had I thought they at least developed

[00:57:26] [SPEAKER_01]: perhaps up more on what Farency Murphy and click had started and instead we got just a reheated

[00:57:34] [SPEAKER_01]: stale rehash of all of that and they didn't even clear the bar of of of linking him to this crime

[00:57:42] [SPEAKER_01]: in any meaningful way and I I think it was a waste of everybody's time so if she doesn't

[00:57:48] [SPEAKER_02]: believe there's any evidence against him it is difficult to understand how she could then

[00:57:52] [SPEAKER_02]: turn around and allow him to be discussed in the trial as a suspect just for everyone's

[00:57:58] [SPEAKER_01]: because I think people you know if they don't have a legal background they might kind of be like well

[00:58:04] [SPEAKER_01]: why not just let them have you know let them have a little treat a little Odinism as a treat

[00:58:08] [SPEAKER_01]: you know why not why not just let them do that it's what they want it would mean a lot to

[00:58:13] [SPEAKER_01]: them why is why is a judge not at all in any way shape or form obligated to just let

[00:58:21] [SPEAKER_01]: the defense in this case do whatever they want when it comes to accusing third party suspects

[00:58:27] [SPEAKER_02]: bringing in the names of people not connected to the crime and accusing them of the crime

[00:58:34] [SPEAKER_02]: not only damages their rights the rights of those third parties but it also just drags out

[00:58:40] [SPEAKER_02]: the proceedings there's no reason for a trial to include evidence that is not relevant to

[00:58:48] [SPEAKER_01]: the matter being litigated but just would it be really really wild and totally out there for a judge

[00:58:54] [SPEAKER_01]: to set a boundary about what what could or could not be done in court is that just so like judges do

[00:59:00] [SPEAKER_01]: that all the time okay because I mean even from people who like you know probably should know better

[00:59:05] [SPEAKER_01]: you do hear a lot of like but why not just let them do it if you know the state can just

[00:59:10] [SPEAKER_01]: debunk it this happens all the time there are rules of evidence in court there's no

[00:59:16] [SPEAKER_01]: it not everything is some weird conspiracy I mean people make such a big deal about everything

[00:59:21] [SPEAKER_01]: that happens in this case without having sort of in some cases any inkling or any willingness to

[00:59:26] [SPEAKER_01]: learn about how it actually works you know and this is a matter you know that could be the

[00:59:31] [SPEAKER_01]: small procedural things like how the first part of the hearing in on August 23rd is going to

[00:59:37] [SPEAKER_01]: be closed people what could be happening there are they going to do an odentous ritual inside

[00:59:41] [SPEAKER_01]: the courtroom no it that happens all the time there's no the judge is not obligated to be the

[00:59:49] [SPEAKER_01]: sort of the media camp counselor she's she's obligated to protect the rights of the defendant

[00:59:54] [SPEAKER_01]: and if having a closed hearing or a partially closed hearing serves that then that's what

[00:59:59] [SPEAKER_01]: she's going to do every time that's that's how it works that happens all the time I mean

[01:00:05] [SPEAKER_01]: it's like people who've never ever looked at a case before then just jumping to conclusions

[01:00:10] [SPEAKER_01]: about every little thing it's just not it's not helpful and like I understand that when you're

[01:00:16] [SPEAKER_01]: not familiar with the topic but it's just better to just be open-minded and learn about whether

[01:00:20] [SPEAKER_01]: something is truly unusual or not and then and then even just the legal interpretations I'm

[01:00:26] [SPEAKER_01]: sure people will be saying oh they don't want you to know the truth about odentism that's

[01:00:30] [SPEAKER_01]: why it's not allowed in trial it's very clearly not allowed in trial because there's not evidence

[01:00:34] [SPEAKER_01]: there that would support it being in trial it does not clear that threshold so I we don't

[01:00:39] [SPEAKER_01]: know that yet but this strongly implies that it's not going to get in at least not as related to

[01:00:45] [SPEAKER_02]: Brad Holder with that are we done I think we're done thank you all for listening I'm sure we'll

[01:00:50] [SPEAKER_02]: talk again soon thanks thanks so much for listening to the murder sheet if you have a tip

[01:00:56] [SPEAKER_02]: concerning one of the cases we cover please email us at murder sheet at gmail.com if you

[01:01:05] [SPEAKER_02]: have actionable information about an unsolved crime please report it to the appropriate authorities

[01:01:13] [SPEAKER_01]: if you're interested in joining our patreon that's available at www.patreon.com

[01:01:20] [SPEAKER_01]: slash murder sheet if you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests you can do so at

[01:01:28] [SPEAKER_01]: www.buymeacoffee.com slash murder sheet we very much appreciate any support

[01:01:36] [SPEAKER_02]: special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee who composed the music for the murder sheet

[01:01:41] [SPEAKER_02]: and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com if you're looking to talk with other listeners

[01:01:49] [SPEAKER_01]: about a case we've covered you can join the murder sheet discussion group on facebook

[01:01:54] [SPEAKER_01]: we mostly focus our time on research and reporting so we're not on social media much

[01:02:00] [SPEAKER_01]: we do try to check our email account but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages

[01:02:07] [SPEAKER_01]: thanks again for listening beat the summertime sluggishness and enhance your every day with our

[01:02:14] [SPEAKER_02]: wonderful sponsor via hemp this is accompanied the crafts award-winning premium thc and thc

[01:02:22] [SPEAKER_02]: free gummies with high quality hemp grown right here on american farms all for an excellent value

[01:02:27] [SPEAKER_02]: especially for murder sheet listeners who get a special deal if you're 21 or older you can experience

[01:02:34] [SPEAKER_02]: it for yourself and get 15% off your first order with our exclusive code msheet at via

[01:02:41] [SPEAKER_02]: hemp.com that's v i i a h e m p .com each of via's gummies is crafted to give you a specific mood

[01:02:53] [SPEAKER_01]: get creative get some rest get focused get some pleasure all with via's delicious gummies

[01:03:00] [SPEAKER_02]: no matter what you're looking for via has you covered their grapefruit cbg and cbd flow state

[01:03:08] [SPEAKER_01]: gummies help me feel energized and focused to get a lot done this summer in terms of scheduling

[01:03:13] [SPEAKER_01]: conducting interviews running around after sources and more you don't need a medical card to enjoy via

[01:03:18] [SPEAKER_02]: hemp and these products ship legally to all 50 states if you're 21 and older head to via

[01:03:26] [SPEAKER_01]: hemp.com and use the code msheet to receive 15 off that's v i i a h e m p .com and use code

[01:03:35] [SPEAKER_01]: msheet at checkout after you purchase they ask you where you heard about them please support our show

[01:03:41] [SPEAKER_01]: and tell them we sent you enhance your every day with via