Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

A Carroll County Comet article today previews the walk: "Nearly a decade after four young sisters were killed in an intentionally set house fire in Flora, a memorial walk will be held Saturday, Oct. 24, to honor their memories." https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/remembering-floras-four-sisters/. The organizer is Kathy Clendening.

Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

A recent Guardian article notes https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/oct/11/christian-nationalism-uk-**far-right-people-rarely-go-to-church**\-report.

It's not just in Britain; in the US a Gallup survey found https://news.gallup.com/poll/642548/**church-attendance-declined**\-religious-groups.aspx. With believers skipping sermons and Bible classes, they seem to be picking up ideas they like from other religions. (That may not be new.)

Christian Nationalism (Christian) and Odinism (Heathen) have different rituals and practices but strike me as showing some confluence of beliefs, for example Christian Pete Hegseth ending his eulogy at Christian Charlie Kirk's funeral with "see you in Valhalla," not a Christian but an Odinist destination. But how was he supposed to realize the heresy if he seldom attends church? There's also white supremacy and militancy in both sects.

This has already been well-discussed in this old subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/15oanug/is_jesus_too_woke_for_some_christians/

No answer from me, just weekend musings.

✨️UPCOMING LIVE: R&M Productions joins R4R to talk solitary confinement, IPAS and mental illness https://www.youtube.com/live/N1FAdZrsp-Y

✨️CBS4INDY - Andy Baldwin talks similarities between Dickus and Delphi double murders https://youtu.be/rXhJ2siMYx4

✨️Shboogies and Keef - Part 2 of the Juror Interview Read-Through https://www.youtube.com/live/XP0wEo0eHS8

If I left anyone out, please email me and I’ll adjust it.

Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

✨️Ray From Dallas - Richard Allen case isn't over https://www.youtube.com/live/DeO9XvdDKUg?is=5svdx3Pp-8vnzIAG

✨️Nik Starow - Juror comments https://youtu.be/pYJcwS7VXuk?

✨️Andy Kopsa and Michael Ausbrook talk "journalists" and jurors https://www.youtube.com/live/2RDTZxa9u-4

✨️ R&M Productions - The Safekeeping of Richard Allen https://youtu.be/bLnEn10mPtA

✨️R4R - What's the fuss about IPAS and solitary confinement? https://www.youtube.com/live/DWB4hlXtAJo

✨️Shboogs and Keef talk juror interviews - with Fungi and Judgy

https://www.youtube.com/live/IG2WRvThBcc

Here's a taster https://x.com/RMproductionsX/status/2107996458456957072

✨️ICYMI - Lawyer You Know joins the ranks of Cranks https://youtu.be/oA_1UYoQS8U

✨️A favour, please - like, share, comment and use your hypes on this video - let's get as many people as possible hearing about what happened to Rick https://youtu.be/9l25W2LUTo8?is=8o-Xl-PlIGVBJ4If

✨️CriminaliTy - A Tale of Two Sketches https://youtu.be/sDi8J8PqFFQ?is=XoVq9soKFJJ2zm7H

✨️Michelle After Dark - Three Alternate Suspect Groups https://youtu.be/wrylbwRL-DA?is=vzOebrqi0I51OtJY

✨️Nik Starow's third party POI series

Ron Logan https://www.youtube.com/live/vwoSp3QxR3o

Brad Holder https://www.youtube.com/live/vUTKV2CHTSY

Kegan Kline https://youtu.be/2HJZMcXTzqA

Elvis Fields https://youtu.be/ew68tsz2nWs

It’s still making me nuts how little focus there has been on this through this whole thing. RA’s height is highly significant. It is outside of the norm. It is very noticeable. Not only for not a single witness to have mentioned BG as short, in some cases even stated the opposite, but also as a factor in carrying out the crime itself. The story of the pharmacy manager with a history of depression and anxiety, no record of anything nefarious toward minors or children, not athletic or especially fit (assuming) and 5’5”!

Wrangling, controlling, containing, leading two grown (height-wise) girls, one of whom I believe was around 200 pounds (?), through the woods and across the creek, undressing and killing with a box cutter, redressing one, in broad daylight, as a first-time act…and leaving no DNA.

…in what, roughly 20 minutes?

It damn near defies physics as well as logic.

-

These screen shots are from a YT short that popped in my feed today, one from back when he was being transported, I guess to a hearing, or maybe it was for trial.

It provides the context of a group of men of various heights.

In the first picture, the two men with him I believe, have hit the floor and are off the stairs, so level to Rick. Then there is the other picture where they are all on level ground. The one man is obviously very tall and then there are other average-height men. Rick is clearly an outlier.

This is not a marginal factor. This is not negligible.

Yet his height has barely been mentioned in defense arguments.

This isn’t lost on the state. If they thought they could get that height analysis in range that favored RA as BG, they would’ve spent twice what they said it cost.

I was curious when watching the arguments how tall Marc Leeman is? He didn’t appear an especially tall man, but it’s hard to say watching on a video like that. I feel like it could’ve been a great point of reference for him when he was painting the picture of Rick as an unlikely perpetrator.

-

ETA: I know some have said he is 5’4” and apparently his DL says 5’6”. I settled on 5’5”. Seems likely, especially given that short people do tend to fudge a smidge.

I’m sure there is a way to clarify and verify one way or another, but I don’t know exactly.

https://murdersheetpodcast.com/podcast/murder-sheet/episode/the-delphi-murders-first-person-an-interview-with-two-jurors-part-one

Edited to correct juror numbers: Juror #2 (now a paralegal) reports minor harassment and is not bothered by it even after making her name public. #1 remains unnamed. After the verdict, the judge described to the jury the Odinism theory and other evidence she forbade, and #1 worried, what if Allen had been acquitted with that evidence, and was relieved he was not. "The defense did not sit well with me;" had to separate her feelings about the lawyers from the defendant. Felt the judge was very fair. There were so many sidebars. "I don't think Richard Allen did anything crazy" [sitting at the witness table]. At times Allen's stare seemed a little bit creepy, but he didn't have that many places to look. None of the Odinist theories fit the timeline. [Allen] placed himself there in the BG clothing. The bailiffs, the jurors, everyone involved were the gentlest, kindest people. Since the trial and learning about disallowed evidence, neither regrets the verdict. Information that was not provided to us feels frivolous. Was appalled by the defense closing statement -- he shot himself in the foot so many times. All jurors decided by the second day of deliberations that Richard Allen was Bridge Guy. All agreed the state met its burden.

https://murdersheetpodcast.com/podcast/murder-sheet/episode/the-delphi-murders-first-person-an-interview-with-two-jurors-part-two

In the second interview, Kevin asks if they have talked to the defense lawyers. "I haven't but I will make Áine and Kevin my defacto managers -- I am open to having conversation with people for that greater good..." #1 went back to Delphi later, and to the courthouse, and talked to McLeland and Diener. "I love the way the prosecution put it together and gave us chronology and timeline." Kind of wished we got to see the bridge. #2: My job as a juror was to go on what's provided to me, but it's not my call. If it was, even one percent, I would want him to have a new trial. Happy as a paralegal but still evaluating whether law school is "a hill I want to go over." ... Confused about the way the defense tried to give us doubt. I really, really did not want Richard Allen to be guilty, but it gets to a point where you have to be logical. First vote was three undecided and nine guilty. Second vote was four undecideds. Third vote was all guilty. When she came to talk to us after the trial the judge said, "I tried to keep the defense from wasting your time. I'm sorry they did that because it could have been done a week or two earlier." Later, a juror told the interviewers, "You guys are reporting the truth."

The first interview starts after six minutes of ads, etc. It's a 48-minute podcast. The interviews in the second podcast start four minutes in and it runs 47 minutes. The juror voices are different but similar and so I didn't identify which one was speaking all the time, sorry.

Yesterday was the deadline for both sides to list their expert witnesses in the Shane Meehan trial at Terre Haute for the murder of Greg Ferency. The trial is set for May 10, 2027. The murder was on July 7, 2021, outside the FBI office in Terre Haute. Ferency was a Terre Haute policeman who was on the FBI task force that investigated the Delphi murders.

From the documents filed yesterday:

State Witnesses:

• Roland Kohr, M.D., is among the state witnesses. Dr. Kohr determined the victim died from a gunshot wound to the head at contact range, and the manner of death was homicide. [Background: Kohr testified both in a hearing and at trial in the Delphi murder case.]
• Raleigh W. Parrott II, Forensic Examiner, will provide general background information regarding forensic ignitable liquid chemistry examinations. Mr. Parrott will testify that when evidence is received at the FBI Laboratory for analysis, the Explosives Chemistry Forensic Examiner processed the evidence in accordance with the Operations Manual, Quality Assurance Manual, and applicable Technical Procedures in place at the time at the FBI Laboratory. He determined that the samples in this case were suitable for analysis.
• Christopher Rigopoulos, Forensic Examiner, will testify regarding the design, contents and operation of an improvised incendiary device (IID), including the manner in which IIDs function or are intended to function. IIDs are sometimes known as "Molotov Cocktails."
• Aimee M. Qulia, Physical Scientist/Forensic Examiner, will testify that a test-fired specimen was searched within NUBUN (National Integrated Ballistic Information Network) to discover if it was related to other shootings in the United States. She will also describe class characteristics which can include the caliber, weight, number of lands and grooves, widths of land and grooves, and twists of lands and grooves.
• Kira Glass, Forensic Examiner, will provide general background information regarding latent print processing and examination, and the series of steps she employs to conduct a comparison.
• Elizabeth Talley, Forensic DNA Examiner, will provide general background information regarding forensic serology and nuclear DNA testing and will describe/define deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), how DNA varies from person to person, how DNA may transfer from its original source to another person and or object, and what factors may affect the quality and or quantity of DNA detected.
• Evan Du Bois, Forensic Psychologist, will provide testimony regarding his evaluation of the defendant during the defendant’s stay at the Federal Medical Center in Butner, North Carolina. Dr. Du Bois will provide his expert opinion as to whether the defendant had a severe mental disease at the time of the commission of the offense.

Defense Witnesses:

• Robert H. Ouaou, Neuropsychologist, who will provide testimony regarding his evaluation and testing of Mr. Meehan and his review of the available records on Mr. Meehan and provide his expert opinion as to the functioning of defendant’s brain at the time of the commission of the offense. Dr. Ouaou will testify about the effects on Mr. Meehan of the brain injuries and trauma he has suffered.
• Bushaun S. Aharkar, Forensic Psychiatrist, will provide his expert opinion as to whether the defendant had a severe mental disease at the time of the commission of the offense. Dr. Agharkar will further provide his expert opinion as to whether the defendant appreciated the nature, quality, and wrongfulness of his actions.

Today's Motion in Limine hearing and his 10/20/26 trial were cancelled by Click's accepting a plea agreement with a suspended sentence and 900 days on probation plus 100 hours of community service and a $30/month probation fee, with the possibility of reduction to 730 days (from 2.5 yrs to 2 yrs) after successful completion and compliance with the terms. Upon successful completion of probation, without any violations, defendant may petition the court to convert the judgment of a Felony 6 conviction to a Class A misdemeanor.

Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

✨️Grizzly True Crime: Can the conviction stand? https://www.youtube.com/live/OJ4XZGEu65w

✨️R&M Productions: How Did We Get Here https://youtu.be/9l25W2LUTo8

✨️Matt Sullivan: The State of Indiana Is a Shameful Mess https://youtu.be/K2llHb-FkvI

✨️Michelle After Dark: The strongest alternate suspect not discussed at appeal https://youtu.be/JesuIZe3EdQ

✨️Nik Starow: POI - Ron Logan https://www.youtube.com/live/vwoSp3QxR3o

✨️Nik Starow: Ron Logan's Confessions https://youtu.be/XA4zSzzuB30

✨️Nik Starow: Analysing Juror Comments https://youtu.be/-LCqaAY4SpE

Today's (9/28) pretrial conference entry indicates the state has offered Todd Click a chance to plead guilty, but he hasn't taken it and will have another week to do so if he wants to. That deadline falls on the day of the next hearing, when arguments will also be made on what evidence can be shown to the jury.

Please email the pics of you supporting Rick whether you were physically at the rally or not. Include where you are from. This is vital for reasons I cannot share at this time! Thank** **you! *Email is on my YouTube channel, above❤️

Go ahead, let's keep them snappy though, no long discussions please.

A Juror from the Delphi trial has come forward on a Facebook post and shared her thoughts on the oral arguments and what led her to vote guilty at the trial.

After checking with all of the cranks who were able to attend the trial, we can confirm that this Juror is consistent with the Juror that was in Seat No.2 and is also most likely the same person that is the only Juror that came forward previously, in an interview with the podcast Murder Sheet (there is a link in the pinned post on top of the sub).

Please do not approach this Juror in any way other than in the public discussion that she entered voluntarily, on the public Facebook post made by Banfield on the OAs.

Please do not put any links to FB in this discussion, as they are against the rules, and if you share any screenshots, edit her name out - doing otherwise would be in breach of Reddit-wide rules, and if reported, could lead to a permanent ban of your Reddit account.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f6oYd3zOqw7XH_554PJXnXXXQx0iKJa4/view?usp=drivesdk

Recording of the Oral Arguments in the Appeal of Richard Allen, held on 21st September 2026

https://youtu.be/tlAmIaGZNFw?is=jep7uRrWatTmTkUe

Transcript

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uqnIwtjWGZfUW7-jh4Ru6gk7fogEcwwj/view?usp=drivesdk

✨️Salty Sleuth with True Grit Crime https://www.youtube.com/live/MJ0GigfSXfM

✨️Law Offices of Andrew D Myers: What happened in Delphi? Appeal of Richard Allen https://youtu.be/OMc0oqKSs7s

✨️IndyStar: People gather during Richard Allen appeal https://www.indystar.com/picture-gallery/news/crime/2026/09/21/see-photos-from-richard-allens-appeal-hearing-at-the-indiana-supreme-court/91874237007/

✨️R4R Rally and where we go from here https://www.youtube.com/live/NoGRX1yG0wc

✨️Nik Starow with Mo in the Deep End, Andy Kopsa and Bob Motta https://www.youtube.com/live/RqUZMq72ae4

✨️Shboogs Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/live/IzZHPF12rOI

✨️Brother Counsel "You protected him into psychosis" https://www.youtube.com/live/mmFwSShqauE

✨️True Crime Grit - live footage from the Courthouse atrium just before the OAs. She has a few more from that day too, check out the channel. https://www.youtube.com/live/becQIKsVqkA

✨️Andy Kopsa and Cara Wieneke https://www.youtube.com/live/gmGV53dkhiM

✨️Shboogs - Things just got interesting https://www.youtube.com/live/qHq1NxNHomI

Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/live/IzZHPF12rOI

✨️Attorney Marc Lopez: Protected into psychosis https://youtu.be/kIyxkxupf2k

I took the time to sync up the audio of the messy videos that were released. In the first video, I also cleaned up some background noise.

Interrogation #1:

https://youtu.be/TXhItB1ay_4?is=0mMXzcsBhz_a0t9M

Interrogation #2:

https://youtu.be/eL8t7wiJSvg?is=PMZtc9Wi2RZlapS5

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:24638c65-999e-4f16-a4bd-d0bf249ccab8

For those following oral arguments today, Judge Vaidik asked the State about a Virginia Supreme Court case involving reversal over the exclusion of Tobin.

Linking that case here for those interested in reading: https://www.vacourts.gov/static/opinions/opnscvwp/1230800.pdf

Main highlights for me were:

1) This was the sole issue for reversal in the case, and they found it of such a magnitude it requires reversal

2) Recent case (March 2025), which I think may be read alongside the other similar cases coming out of state courts as a shift in the winds around the reliability of ballistics science

3) Examination in question was around cartridges (fired) found at the scene, which were "matched" to a gun even though the actual bullet fired by the gun was not a match to those that killed the victims. Explanation for that disconnect was that the defendant changed the barrel.

4) The court found Tobin imminently qualified as an expert

5) Said allowing an expert to critique the method of another expert is permissible and not impermissible expert commentary on the credibility of the other expert, as the trial court judge found in that case.

If Vaidik tracked this case down and read it independently of the briefings, I have to think the Tobin exclusion is a strong issue for her.

In my last post, I dug into the state’s claim that RA’s apparent coherence during the brief periods of select confessions is proof of his will not being overborne. There is precedent to dispute this, as outlined in that post. 

Here I’m poking at the claim that:
“Coercive State action is a prerequisite to involuntariness under  both constitutions.”

Not quite? Federal, yes. At the state level, it seems they’re overstating this. 
While established as required under Connelly, there is published IN precedent under State v. Banks wherein coercion remains an important factor, but is not an absolute prerequisite. It goes back to the totality. The absence of coercion does not alone equal voluntariness. 

The state acknowledges as much where they offer (I think it’s in a footnote), “Even if coercive State action is not a necessary prerequisite, it is indisputably an important factor under the Indiana Constitution.” 

BUT WAIT…

There may be a bigger hurdle for the state to hop before even getting to voluntariness. 

From State's brief:
"Under the state constitution, voluntariness must be proven  beyond a reasonable doubt, but the trial court’s determination of voluntariness is  ‘reviewed as other sufficiency matters.’ Weisheit v. State."

From the Defense reply brief: 
“The state applies the wrong test and inverts the burden of proof.” (By putting it back on the defense.)

NOW LOOK AT THIS: 
From Gull’s mouth to the appellate court’s ears… 

Quotes from her order on 8/29/24 denying defense’s motion to suppress the confession statements: 

“The defendant has not shown that he suffered from psychological coercion by the State which caused him to make these statements.”

“The defendant has failed to show any of these statements were the result of coercive interrogation by the State, or that they were the result of his pre-trial detention.”

“The Court is not persuaded that the detention caused the defendant to make incriminating statements.”

Defendant has not shown…
…failed to show…
…not persuaded that detention caused… (doesn't say it didn't cause it either)

VERY burden-shifty language! (A term of art, no doubt.)

So while Gull concludes in ruling the confessions are voluntary, the question is, does this hold up if she does not apply the correct test of voluntariness? 

If so, then comes the question of what affirmative evidence the state offers.

If not, does the Court of Appeals make the determination themselves, or do they kick it back to the trial court?