Content warning, this episode contains discussion of the brutal murder of two girls, as well as issues around mental health.So today is November 1st, 2024.We are still here in the Delphi trial, covering it every day.And today was another day.
It was kind of the first full day of the defense put putting on its case.And so we're here to report back to you about what we saw. My name is Anya Kane.I'm a journalist.
And I'm Kevin Greenlee.I'm an attorney.
And this is The Murder Sheet.
We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews and deep dives into murder cases.We're The Murder Sheet.
And this is The Delphi Murders.Richard Allen on trial.Day 13.Intern, exterminator, photographer, sheriff.
That title sounded like a cool John le Carre novel in my head, but when I said it out loud it just sounded kind of confusing, so I definitely take the blame for that.One thing we want to give thanks for is our wonderful linesitters last night.
Folks, you lifesavers, you linesitters, you're saving our lives and you're making this possible for us to do this. without sounding quite as out of our minds as we would otherwise.I think it's still not perfect, but we just want to thank you.
Thank you to Jennifer Lynn and to Michelle Jensen.You guys are awesome.We really appreciate you.And we want to welcome Michelle into the coveted two-timers wing of the old Lifesavers department.Kevin's rolling out.
He's building this whole thing up into quite a thing.
Yeah, as you are wont to do.But yeah, we really appreciate you guys and just everyone who sent nice notes and offered help and just like just know that means a lot to us.
And, you know, we we are choosing to do this because we want to get you information about what's happening here.There's a lot of noise and hopefully this can help shine a light on some of the stuff that's going on.
But ultimately, we just, you know, we just appreciate how lovely everyone's been.And so thank you.
And I want to say that one of the security personnel was very kind to me today, said some very nice things.So thank you to him.
Aww.Well, that was very nice, yeah.And just, you know, it's nice.I feel like we've gotten to know people who've been coming a lot and then got to meet new people who kind of come for one day and that's always just been very nice.
So just like everyone we've had a conversation with, you know, just like, we appreciate you.Like, I think
Not quite everyone, but most people.Well, I mean, most people, most people.
Whoa, now everyone's like, what's the tea?No, but I mean, seriously, I think it's been a nice collegial environment for the most part, with some exceptions.
If anybody wants to know the tea, maybe late at night at some future crime con, they can buy me a Mr. Pibb and try it out.
Oh my God, Kevin gets wasted on a Mr. Pibb somehow.Just spills all his secrets. Well, listen, let's get to the business.
Let's get to the business.So today was the first full day for the defense.Of course, they started their case yesterday with a couple of witnesses who, frankly, didn't seem terribly relevant.
They stumbled at the starting block.
So let's see how they did on their first full day.
I used to be a competitive swimmer and I just thought of somebody like, if you accidentally dive off the block before the buzzer goes, then you get disqualified.And it just, it was not an auspicious start.
But today I was kind of like, listen, if they turn it around with some really great expert witnesses, we could be seeing kind of like, okay, here's where they're going. could be getting the thrust behind what they're going to say.
And I've always said this, that I believe that this defense team has the capability of potentially doing some really good work on this.And so we'll discuss about whether we saw that today.
And let me say something else.If they want their client to be acquitted, they have to do more than just turn it around and do a good job.They have to, like, do the trial equivalent of bowling a 300 game.They have to be on
they have to be at their best doing just incredible work and Blowing us all away.
Well, I mean because the case against Richard Allen frankly is very strong the prosecution put him at the bottom of a deep hole and Yes, I concur a lot of people don't agree with us on that and that's okay people can have different perspectives I think most of the people who disagree have not been sitting in this courtroom
And I'm concerned that some of the sources of information for what's happening in the courtroom are not what you or I would consider to be accurate or reliable.
That's completely fair.And I also just, you know, it's it's it's really stunning to see some of the discrepancies.But I will say this, you know, I agree with you.This is a strong case against Richard Allen.
The state built a strong foundation and then built on and built on and built on it.It's going to take some work to knock down some of those blocks, but
You know, having a bunch of witnesses who don't really have anything to do with anything is not the way forward.And so, of course, that's what we got today.
Spoilers.Spoiler alert.So the first witness was a man named Christopher Gauthier.Yeah, Gauthier.I think you pronounce it Gauthier.Yeah.
Before we get into what he testified about, I think we need to give you a quick reminder that some of the most crucial evidence in this case involves a confession that Richard Allen gave to his therapist, Dr. Monica Walla, and the most important part of that confession is he indicates that he had the two girls who he intended to rape near
road, sometimes they refer to it as an access road, sometimes they refer to it as a long driveway, has it in the general vicinity of that road preparing to rape the girls beneath the bridge when he is startled by a van going by.
and then he is scared, he crosses the creek with them, and he commits murder.
And so the prosecution was able to produce someone who lived at the end of that road, a man named Brad Weber, who indeed seems to have been going home at that time from work.
They established that he got off work at 2.02 and it was about a 25-minute drive.So that would put him at that access road where Richard Allen says he saw him, at about the time Richard Allen says he saw him.
There has been some sort of indications that Mr. Weber has given a number of statements to law enforcement, and at least one of them seems to have been given to the FBI.
And there have been suggestions that perhaps that statement doesn't fit with his other statements, including what he said in court.But keep in mind, we have not seen this statement.
Yeah.When I think about it, there could be a I mean, like, here's the thing.If it comes out that all of the statements were no, I was actually hit an ATM site side business.If I was servicing ATMs that day, I couldn't have gotten home at that time.
Then I think the state has a problem on their hands.If it comes out that in one of multiple statements,
he mentions ATMs, like sometimes I would do that when going home, but it's not specific, then I don't think the state has a problem on their hands.It just depends, we're gonna have to find out with everyone else.
But I'm just, you know, it could be a big deal, could be not a big deal, and I'm kind of not willing to really get into it, because we just don't know what was said at this point.Is that where you kind of stand, or where are you on that?
Yeah, that's where I stand.
So that's where Christopher Gauthier comes in.
Yes, he works with the Hammond Police Department.
I thought it said Hammond.
No, you're right.It's Hammond.I'm sorry.
Very, very hard to hear in this.
You're so right, because he's talking about Hammond is near Chicago.
And also, at one point, he refers to Merrillville, which, of course, is close to Hammond.
It's very difficult to hear in this courtroom, and if you've been listening to previous episodes, you know there have been many occasions where either I have misheard something or Anya has.
I should have figured that out from context clues, though, so I appreciate you correcting me because I wrote down very confidently Camden here, but you're absolutely right.
This gentleman works, he works with him, police department, but he is assigned to a task force with the FBI, I believe it's called GRIT, for gang response investigation.And as part of this, he worked with FBI Special Agent, I believe, Adam Pohl.
And they were in 2017 assigned to this case, the case of the murders of Liberty German and Abigail Williams.And their assignment was basically to go around and do canvas interviews.What are those?
Canvas interviews are when you're essentially going around to people in the area and asking if anyone saw anything.Am I even right about that?
Yeah, basically, you're just going around doing basic interviews.Essentially, you're gathering data.Yes.And information.And so the other law enforcement people have it.It's a very valuable thing.
Not necessarily the most glamorous thing, but it's very, very important.
I thought it was Jennifer OJ doing the direct examination.And he mentioned his training.He also went into how he was trained in the Reed School technique of interviewing suspects and talking to somebody.
I just thought that was interesting because that was something Holman mentioned, Jerry Holman, a lieutenant with the Indiana State Police and the lead investigator on this case.
mentioned, and I know the defense was was was not super happy with what some of the things he was saying about interviewing, but they didn't question Gauthier on that at all.
And this may be a good point before we get into what happened with Gauthier.This might be a good point to mention.He did not seem the least bit happy to be there.No.And he was not really being what you would call helpful to the defense.
Uh, like Jennifer OJ was asking him, I mean, he was answering, he was answering questions.He was doing the minimum.Uh, but he clearly was not happy about this.
I don't think a lot of these witnesses were frankly.
Yeah, so at one point, for instance, we just mentioned that he conducted some Canvas interviews, and Jennifer OJ said, oh, did you do anything besides conduct interviews?And he just kind of looked at her and said, like, why?
That was a funny moment.And then she says, well, I'm asking the questions here.
This is when he says, well, one of the people I spoke to, of course, is Brad Weber. And we asked him about his whereabouts on February 13th.And he said that after he got off work that day, he went straight home.
Now, this is interesting because around this time, Nicholas McClellan, the Carroll County prosecutor, objected hearsay.
Oh, I'm sorry.Go ahead.You're jumping ahead.
So he spoke with Brad Weber, and Brad Weber told him that he went home.And Jennifer OJ said, straight home?And he said, I don't recall.
And then she said, well, I have this FBI report, and maybe if you look at that, maybe that would refresh your recollection.
And that is when Nick McLean, the prosecutor, objected and said, there's a lack of foundation here because that report was not written by you.But he was allowed to look at it.And he said, oh, it says I spoke with Weber on February 19th.
And she said, does this refresh your recollection as to whether or not he went straight home looking at this report?And he said, no, it doesn't refresh my recollection. And that was about the end of it.
And, you know, I mean, because it's like he didn't write the report.I imagine they were doing plenty of interviews.
So I can understand why someone who's like rushing around all day talking to different people would not remember the minutia of one random interview he did.
So first witness of the day and the defense did not get what they wanted from that witness.
And also McLuhan didn't ask any questions.Whenever you have the opposing counsel just basically after a witness comes out not even bother with cross-examination. that's a signal that it's basically like why raise anything that didn't do it.
So that was it for Goatee.No jury questions either.
I think when the jury doesn't answer questions, I think it's either like, I mean, I don't want to be mind reading the jury, but my opinion is that it's either they're saying, okay, we completely understood that, no issues, or they're saying like, well, okay.
Thanks for letting us know.I think that you can kind of read something into the silence there, but you know, it's just my thought.
Our wonderful sponsor, Viahemp, is offering our listeners a terrific, affordable deal on premium hemp products, just in time for the holidays.If you're 21 and up, treat yourself to 15% off with our exclusive code, msheet, at viahemp.com.
That's V-I-I-A-H-E-M-P.com.
Via Hemp has served over half a million customers, delivering on USA Farmed lab-tested and certified hemp products that can fit easily into your budget.
They craft gummies, vapes, topicals, and drops that fit each mood and goal, from relaxing to getting productive to catching better sleep.
If you're looking for premium hemp THC gummies, they've got products ranging from zero milligrams to 100 milligrams.You can microdose or really dive in.
And if THC is not your thing, they've got a lot of terrific zero THC products that can help with energy, focus, and sleep.
For instance, Viya's Grapefruit Flowstate Gummies have CBG and CBD in them.They're THC-free.I really dig them because they help me get creative and productive.
I was able to work hard without getting super stressed about it, and I feel so accomplished at the end of the day.
This holiday season, gift yourself some peace of mind.If you're over 21, head to viahemp.com and use the code MSHEET to receive 15% off.That's V-I-I-A hemp.com and use code MSHEET at checkout.Please support our show and tell them we sent you.
Enhance your every day with Viya.This holiday season, enhance your every day with Viya. Let's talk about one sponsor we are really excited about.The Silver Linings Handbook with Jason Blair.
If you've listened to our show, you've heard from Jason.He's always got excellent insights on true crime.Well, he's also got a wonderful weekly podcast that's all about fascinating conversations with inspiring people.
The thing about Jason is that he is one of the most compassionate and interesting people we know, which definitely helps him out on the interviewing front.
Listening to the Silver Linings Handbook feels like sitting around a campfire with interesting storytellers.You get into topics like the criminal justice system, spirituality, and mental health.
And the big through line is it's all thoughtful and human-centric.
We've so enjoyed getting to go on the Silver Linings Handbook to talk about true crime.Jason always makes us believe in the bright side of true crime, and I always end up endlessly quoting him afterwards.
These talks are just so engaging, as well as being completely unscripted and authentic.
Jason is a person whose experiences with loss and failure have helped him rebuild and shape into the empathetic, kind person we know and love.
And that is ultimately what The Silver Linings Handbook is all about, growing together, understanding one another, and moving forward with greater compassion.
Subscribe to The Silver Linings Handbook wherever you listen to podcasts.
Tell us about the next witness, especially because I'm not sure I got her name.
This witness is presented by Brad Rosie, the lead counsel for Richard Allen.
Yes, and I apologize to this woman for, I'm presuming I'm gonna say her name wrong, but I had in my notes, oh no, I think I got it, Dr. Deanna Dwenger. And she was a woman with a doctorate in clinical psychology.
She is the director for mental health with Indiana Department of Correction.
You're right, you're correct, it's behavioral health.I'm a director for behavioral health with IDOC.She got her doctorate in 2023, and here's the difference between her and Dr. Monica Walla.
So before, she's higher up in the hierarchy than Walla, but Dr. Walla works for a vendor called Centurion that contracts with IDOC.So she's on the ground, boots on the ground, doing stuff with the inmates.
Whereas Dr. Dwenger works directly for IDOC and she's in more of a supervisor position where she is overseeing the contract with Centurion and therefore all of the mental health professionals working there.
And so that's kind of where she is basically. So she noted that Dr. Wallace's direct supervisor was one Dr. Karis, a clinical supervisor.
So she's not like necessarily Wallace, not directly reporting to her, but she's just someone above them on, I guess, on the hierarchy in terms of running this.
and she had nothing to do with Alan being transferred ultimately from Westfield to Wabash Valley, has never met Richard Allen, played no role in him moving around, but she did kind of play a role in general, overseeing things.
And Dr. Walla at some point would be bouncing ideas off of her on how to help improve Richard Allen's mental health.So she definitely had a role, but not necessarily a direct one.She was not directly observing him.
She noted that today is the first time she ever saw him.
Right.She talked about how people who have mental health issues, solitary confinement, or she called it restrictive housing, to be damaging.
And I think at some point the state might want to consider clearly explaining why Richard Allen was in solitary confinement.
Because I'm not sure if the jury really gets that. And there have certainly been hints, and we've alluded to it on the show, how people who are kids generally are the least popular people in prisons.And he was accused of killing two kids.
And... That goes for jails too, by the way.
Jails too.And we know that there were people, other inmates, yelling at him to kill himself or harm himself.And so it would seem like
quite likely the reason why they put him in solitary confinement was not because they wanted to be mean, but because they wanted to keep him alive and they felt they needed to take extreme measures to do so.
And in fact, the whole reason that Carroll County transferred him from the Carroll County Jail to the custody of Indiana Department of Corrections is because they didn't think they could protect him from the other inmates in their jail.
This is one of the most notorious crimes in Indiana history.And so I would imagine that the person who stands charged with committing it would have a pretty big target on his back.
He would get shivved.Let's just be blunt.That's. That's what happens to people who are accused of that or convicted of that.But unfortunately, it wouldn't matter either way.
Keeping him in Carroll County, you'd have a lot of people who are very acutely aware of the case who could possibly harming and keeping him in prison.Again, same thing.General population would have, in my opinion,
from from talking with correctional officers and former inmates and variety of people both on the show and behind the scenes would have been very dangerous for Richard Allen.It's very unfortunate.
More but more so than that is, you know, the kind of the mental health.He was constantly going back and forth on suicide watch that also complicated things and made things frankly more restrictive for him than perhaps otherwise.
So it's it's a bad situation.I I mean, I don't have any solutions.I can understand why the defense is complaining about it to a certain extent, because it's like, yeah, it sounds awful.
But at the same time, I mean, I don't know what would have been the appropriate thing.
It seems like the people — Their objective was to keep him safe and alive.And they did do that.
You know, and yeah, I think basically what she testified to is goal number one, keep the person alive.Goal number two, try to make it as mentally healthy as possible.
That's firmly second place because you cannot work on the mental health of a dead person who's been killed by another inmate.So when it comes to Dr. Walla, This came up early on.She talked about how in early 2022, do I have that right?
Not early 2022, it must be early 2023.
She said early 2022.Must have been 2023.And then she said, no, I mean, it was corrected.
In early 2023, Dr. Walla went to Dr. Dwenger and was advocating for Mr. Allen to have a visit with his wife.She felt that that would be really important.Around this time, she also disclosed that Walla was very much a true crime fan.
Quote, I knew at that point she had interest, end quote.She even recommended podcasts to Dr. Dwenger and let her know.And so, This is where something came up where Rosie asked her, well, did she tell you that she visited the crime scene?Right?
They've made a big deal about Walla visiting crime scene.Dwenger replied, quote, I think she did that prior to knowing she would ever treat. Someone, you know, connected to this.So that was interesting.
I think the idea of a mental health professional like treating someone in a high profile case and then kind of going around to all the like big locales and like kind of exploring it, that might give some people pause, understandably.
Could feel like, well, maybe you should have more professional distance.
But if Dr. Dwenger is clearing up and saying that Dr. Walla visited the Moan-on-High Bridge, like many people interested in the case do, well before she ever knew she would ever meet Richard Allen, that is much less big of a deal, in my opinion.
Is that fair to say?I mean, what do you think?
certainly much less big of a deal.She's not a she's a psychologist.She's not a psychic.She can't know, hey, I'm going to meet somebody who's accused of this.And it sounds like she did disclose it to her supervisors.
Again, like her looking up Kagan Klein's information in the system seems certainly
Quite problematic and people say the least people have mentioned that and I'm I'm I'm not disputing that I'm just saying some of the other things that the defense is thrown at her sort of to make her seem like some obsessed true crime fan Seem a bit unfair when we're getting more details, which is kind of surprising given the fact that this person is the defense's witness
You know, like, they're kind of inviting her up to maybe, like, debunk some of this stuff.I don't even know why.
At this point, Stacey Diener, who was handling cross-examination, called a sidebar, and she wanted to emphasize that the Monon High Bridge was... Referring to that as the crime scene is not entirely accurate.
All the girls were abducted from one end of the Monon High Bridge.They were murdered at a kind of shallow depression on the banks of Deer Creek.So, you know,
It's a bit more complicated than you can't just that's not the crime scene It's part of a large swath of area that that you know that encompasses the crime scene.So Rosie had a layoff of that.
We're also introduced to other characters that have come up in the in the past.Dr. Martin was a psychiatrist at Westville and And he was responsible for dealing with some of this and prescribing medications.
As psychiatrists prescribe medication, psychologists do more of the therapy style.I'm really boiling it down here, but that's kind of, a psychiatrist is a medical doctor is an MD.So that's kind of the difference.
Rosie tried to bring up the fact that there have been some lawsuits filed against the Indiana Department of Corrections, and Stacey Deaner objected and shut that down, because I believe that that was covered in a motion to eliminate, was it not?
It was.This defense team keeps on, I would say, like leaping headfirst over the line in a variety of situations, whether it's motions and limine or other things that have been sort of discussed and already adjudicated.
And that's just something that they do.
But... You want to talk a bit about Stacey Diener's cross-examination?
Let me just look and make sure there's nothing.They talked about the different codes of mental health, you know, and Alan was a D, meaning he needed an individual therapist.E would have meant he would be sent to the mental health ward.
She said that she didn't think that safe quote, we have safe keepers regularly.She didn't seem to think it was as rare as the defense was acting like and indicated that they she's aware of nine safe keepers.
Although, you know, they're obviously Richard Allen is, in fairness, occupying a pretty unique position. And in quote, they come to us because the jail can't manage them, end quote.
It's again, seemed like a lot of what she wasn't like opinionated or kind of fighting back against the defense.It just seemed like a lot of the stuff she was saying was ultimately better for the prosecution.
And we see more of that in the juror questions.
Yeah, we definitely will.She did say that she had concern about the camera.She even recommended cameras be removed.
You mean, what cameras are you referring to, Anya?
The cameras in his cell.Right.Which don't record audio, but just video.She felt like someone who was dealing with depression might feel like really watched by that, but that wasn't done.
That's a safety measure to, you know, basically be able to watch him and make sure he doesn't start doing anything to himself.So it's not surprising to me. And yeah, I guess- On the cross real quick?Yeah, let's do cross.
Cross Stacy Diener, she establishes that when Richard Allen arrived at Westville, he was not seriously mentally ill.
In April of 2023, Monica Walla actually contacted this witness to advocate for Richard Allen receiving a face-to-face visit with his wife. Dr. Walla also told her that she suspected Richard Allen was faking his symptoms.
She also talked about how even if he was faking his symptoms, he was suffering consequences from that that ultimately made it difficult to find much of a difference between
it almost no longer mattered if it was fake or real, for instance, because if you're not eating and not sleeping as part of faking something, at some point, the effects of not eating and not sleeping, even as part of your ruse, are going to harm you.
Yeah, he was deteriorating no matter what.And yeah, quote, whether he had chosen not to sleep or chosen not to eat, those behaviors would affect his mental health.So essentially,
As Dr. Wallace said in her testimony, it didn't matter if he was fainting.They needed to intervene.And that meant Haldol.And this is a medication that they were using.She actually went into it.
She herself has experience at one of the mental health facilities from the state at Newcastle and talked about, quote, Haldol is used very frequently with people who have psychosis.
And she went in helpful detail to like, Haldol is like something that is meant to target symptoms.
She gave the example of if somebody's not, who has psychosis is not showering because they have a prosecutorial belief that the prison guards are going to put poison in the showerhead and kill them.Haldol can basically calm them down.
and maybe get them to take the shower so that their basic needs are being met a bit more.And then it can also occasionally help with sleep, although that kind of is dependent on the person.Rosie redirects then.
And he tried to bring up the lawsuit again, and it didn't.It got sidebar.
I just wrote Diener defends defense with lots of well-timed objections.
I love that alliteration.Hey, you're good.
Before we get to the jury questions, I want to mention something else that for me, with a lot of these witnesses, it's a case of the dog that doesn't bark.Because if I was a member of this jury, And I was looking for reasonable doubt.
What I would want to see in witnesses is I would want to see them discuss reasons why Richard Allen was not the killer.I would want to see reasons why Richard Allen was not the man on the bridge.
And they are studiously avoiding that topic altogether.Instead, they're talking about, oh, somebody was at the bridge an hour later.They didn't see anything.Oh, someone was, uh, in the neighborhood of five hours earlier.They saw a fella.
So they're not really addressing the heart of the matter, which is to me, is was he that man on the bridge?And for me, that's the dog that doesn't bark, by which I mean, the fact that they are not addressing that makes me think maybe they can't.
Where was he that day if he wasn't, I mean, like if they're saying he showed up at the bridge at the wrong time and left early, where was he the rest of the day?Was someone, did someone,
I mean, is his mom gonna testify about what he was doing that morning when he came to visit her?Was he in a good mood?Did he seem fine?I mean, or was something going on?
Let's talk about, if I was in this jury, I would want them to talk about Richard Allen, February 13th, 2017.
But this is all matching pretrial.Pretrial, it was, who's Richard Allen?Let's talk about Odinism.Who's Richard Allen?Let's talk about Kagan-Klein.They don't want to talk about Richard Allen.
And I suggest respectfully, there must be a reason for that.
And I want to say this now, because we're going to get into jury questions.
Can I just say, Diener really did very well today with this, with the jury questions.
Yes.And ultimately, after these jury questions, people were going around saying, oh, my God, that was a great witness for the prosecution.Tell us about the jury questions, Anya.
Yeah, I just really want to commend Stacey Diener.She really, I like her style.She's very kind of calm. calm kind of way of asking questions, posing questions.But in this, she was like, I was like, oh, man, she's on a roll here.
So, well, question number one, does the Indiana Department of Correction ever place safe keepers in general population?Dr. Dwenger said with.I can't really read my handwriting here.Do you remember what she said?What prevent?Oh, yeah.Yes, they do.
I had written it in like a corner.That's my bad.It's not even just have bad handwriting.It's like my writing is in places I'm not expecting.And then Deener said, what prevented that with Richard Allen?
And, you know, that that was sort of his behavior.
Next question, could it be that Richard Allen was faking symptoms so he wouldn't be moved to general population because he feared harm?And the answer was yes.I've seen that sort of thing.
Yes.And then also, yeah, I think they asked her if she'd ever actually like kind of treated him yourself, that maybe that was in there.
And she never visited Westfield.Now hit us with this question, the next question I believe is, when faking mental health issues, could a person slip truths in?
And this is Dr. Dwenger's eyes almost lit up.She's like, that's a really interesting question.I've never gotten that question before.And I was like, oh, here we go.
And at first, the way the question was phrased was honestly a little bit confusing, because it was like, wait, if a person is faking, can they slip in truths?Huh?Got to a very interesting place.Diener used it to her advantage.
And basically, after mulling it over a bit, Dwenger kind of came out with like, Yeah.
And she basically said that sometimes a psychotic person, it's complicated because somebody, somebody, sometimes somebody in psychosis will actually be telling the truth about what happened.And then other times they won't.
It's it's it's just it's just ramblings.
And Diener asked, as a follow-up, if a person makes statements, what would you look for in terms of determining whether the statements are because of reality and they're speaking the truth or because of some sort of mental health issues?
Game on.Meanwhile, keep in mind, right before this, Rosie had passed on the question, like passed on questions.He was like, no questions.And then she comes in and I'm like, oh, man. So.
She talks Dwenger talked about how people who are psychotic will detach from reality and she said it's often helpful to listen to your body language when you're trying to assess whether or not someone is faking or feigning or being truthful about being psychotic.
Questions like you know she can use an analogy of if somebody says oh I went to the grocery store and then I bought some cans of I bought some boxes of cereal and then I put them in the cart and then I took them out and I went home.
You know, that's very, that's a linear story.You know, I'm kind of just going through chronologically and telling you logically what happened.
But if I'm suddenly, her example was like, if you have someone who's saying, yes, I went to the grocery store and then I saw someone who looked like my mom and then, you know, my mom was like, it's almost like it's disorganized thoughts.
You're looking at the organization, the logic.And she also noted that a lot of psychotic episodes boil down to several different themes.She named five themes.There could be more, but these were ones that were very common.
So the first is persecutory themes.This is as if, like, the FBI has put microphones in my house to spy on me, and they're coming to get me, and then they're going to do something bad to me.Everyone's out to get me, that kind of thing.
Two is hypersexuality, which is when someone's like, I am just such a God's gift to humanity.Everyone wants to make love to me, and that's why I have to have a million babies. Three is religiosity, which isn't just being very into religion.
It's like literally like, hi, I'm Joan of Arc reincarnated here to free France.You're welcome, everybody.Let's do it for.
Jealousy that's self-evident, you know that with a partner or whatnot and five is command That's when it's like the TV told me to go steal cereal, right?
You know the the guy on the TV is God and he's telling me he's giving me the directions and that's why I'm doing this so
When she said when someone is in a psychotic state You know this loose association kind of sudden changes and Oftentimes it goes back to some of those themes as part, you know, like I you know I killed them and I'm also Joan of Arc and that's why I killed them and then I went and did this and that the death
And yeah, I mean, it was one of those things where I could like you could see it sort of chipping away because just the other day we had heard all these confessions from Richard Allen and none of them sounded anything like that.
Yeah, they all sounded very organized, and by this witness's standards, they didn't sound like psychosis.
They were cogent.They were logical.He wasn't flitting off into other topics.He'd say, I did it, and they'd be like, no, you didn't.He's like, kinda, you need to hear me.Yes, I did.
And they weren't detailed, but they were certainly not what we're being told would be something that would be indicative of a psychotic episode.And then they talked about, you know, delusions.
Delusions, quote, delusions are things you think are not real. Delusions are things you think that are not reality-based.Rosie cut in at some point and said he wanted to ask some questions.
He already passed on it and then Diener's like going nuts with this whole thing.And so then he has to kind of come back in and said, Basically, what about delirium?So delirium, Dwenger defined as psychosis when you get caused by a medical issue.
She used the example of sometimes an older person gets some sort of medical issue and they get to the hospital and they're totally psychotic because of this medical issue.It's not an underlying mental health thing necessarily, but it's like
And and then Dwenger noted that Richard Allen was assessed medically to ensure that he was not dealing with delirium and therefore psychosis due to a medical issue.
Rosie seemed like not to be aware of that, really, which was kind of surprising, because there's a lot of questions that are being asked that I don't think the defense knows the answer to, which is kind of.
Not a great thing, or at least they don't seem to know the answer to because it's setting up like layups for the prosecution.
Yeah, we'll get more into this.It feels to me that the defense was not prepared for this trial.
But go on.Basically, Dwenger said that they assessed him medically.They had a whole team devoted to dealing with his care.And they found that he was not dealing with delirium.
He did not have some medical issue that was leading him to say these things or be psychotic. Anyways, then more some lesser, less dramatic questions.You know, the typical process of safekeeper.
They kind of went over that and sort of what's the primary obligation of safekeepers and of the of Indiana Department of Correction dealing with safekeepers and what Dwenger said was keep them safe.That's number one.Keep them safe.Keep them alive.
Keep them away from harm. And that certainly fits the solitary confinement as harsh as that is.I will say, interestingly enough, at one point she mentioned that with solitary confinement, It's not clear.She said it's not clear based on the research.
Sometimes some research indicates that it's strongly, strongly detrimental to to anyone's mental health and it's just really bad.But there's been also some that kind of doesn't necessarily always find for everyone a difference between
that kind of incarceration versus being more in gen pop.Did you catch that when she talked about studies?But it's kind of, maybe needs more research.
I think it sounds like something that could maybe affect different people differently, but I also think it does sound very, something that would really wear on you mentally.
So, I mean, I can understand why it would affect people very negatively mental health wise.
Ready to move on to the next witness?
Well, there was a break, right?
Do you want to talk about what happened during the break?
What happened during the break?
Oh, this was the pointing.Was this the pointing?Yeah, it's in my notes.It's been a long day, ladies and gentlemen.So this is an odd incident.Take of it what you will.So there was a break.
Anya and I were in towards the back of the courtroom standing, and we were talking to a couple of very nice ladies. And Anya is, she often does, she carries on the bulk of the conversation.She carries that burden while I just kind of relax.
And I noticed something Anya doesn't notice, which is that Richard Allen is staring intently. at us.And so my reaction to that is I just stare right back at him.
I maintain eye contact with him until he turns away, and then I pay attention to the conversation.
And then something makes me look, and Richard Allen is standing next to Andrew Baldwin, and Richard Allen appears to be pointing straight at Anya and myself.And I called it to your attention.
Yeah, I didn't notice at all.As usual, oblivious.It was odd.But I don't know what to make of that.Maybe he was just like, who are these people?
Maybe he wasn't even pointing to us.
He might have been pointing at, who knows?I think he was pointing at us, but it's, there's always a possibility that he was pointing at someone else, but the courtroom was not super full at that point.
Yeah, so an odd incident.A little bit odd.
Yeah.No, actually it was, it was odd.
A little bit odd.So what would be a lot odd?I don't know.
I was like, okay.I mean, he stared, he stared at, us.And then we know I feel like everyone who's been at court a lot has this, oh yeah, he was staring at me story at this point.But I've never seen him point at anyone before.
It was the first point he.
So that's fun.Next up for the defense.
This witness ended up taking quite a bit of time, but I think I can breeze through it pretty quickly because there's not a lot of substance.So this next witness is a young man named Max Baker.
He just graduated from IU with a bachelor's and he works as a legal assistant for none other than Brad Rosey.
And he kind of said that he is their equivalent of Brian Harshman by which they mean that he's the guy that's listening to all of Richard Allen's phone calls and watching all of Richard Allen's videos and stuff.And that is interesting to me.
I'll say this quickly because they acted like it was such a huge violation for Brian Harshman to be doing this and they have a guy doing it too. But let's just let that go.
Can I just say, though, I mean, he's an intern for this legal team.How cool would it be to be, like, just out of college and, like, working on such a huge trial?Like, right?I mean, like, wow, what an experience.
I mean, I just I was just thinking about it from that perspective, too.Like, that must be pretty interesting.And, like, you're kind of coming right out of the gate with with someone.
He's been working for Rosie for a couple of years.
I know.And I'm just like, I mean, yeah, that's I mean, I think that's kind of neat.But anyway, let's go.
So he is their tape guy and so he prepared some sort of tape compilation of I guess Richard Allen's greatest hits from Westville that the defense wanted to show and this was going to be partially taken from camcorder footage which would be
When Richard Allen was being moved from his cell to another location like a shower or whatever or to a rack, they would tape him with a camcorder and it would also include some security cam footage from inside his cell.
The camcorder footage has audio and the security cam footage from inside the cell does not. At this point, there's lots of objections and sidebars, and there's legal arguments that we are not privy to.
But the end result of those legal arguments appears to be that the camcorder footage appears to be that the in-cell footage is not going to be shown, but the camcorder footage is only without audio.
That's my understanding.That's what I have in my notes.Apologies if we have these confused, but I'm pretty sure camcorder when he's being recorded and being moved to like the showers or whatnot is in sans audio and in Sellers Out.
And there was a further restriction.The judge says only footage taken from April, May, June and July of 2023 can be shown to the jury.
Which is which is when he was at his worst.Right.Mentally seemingly the most symptomatic time for Richard Allen.The most the time where he's really acting out.
I just want to also note that Kathy Allen as well as Richard Allen's sister who were there today
They left prior to this witness.So let me say what happens next.So only footage from April, May, June, July can be shown.And so Prosecutor Nick McClellan says, let me ask some preliminary questions.
And basically he asked, how do we know that these videos you're going to be showing us actually come from those months? And Max said, well, you know, they were in folders that seemed to have those months listed on them.
And so at that point, Judge Gull had the jury leave.And she says, said, I'm paraphrasing here, she indicated, I only said videos from certain days can be shown.
And now you say you have no idea what the dates are other than the fact that they might be in a random folder.That's not good enough.The defense says, well, we're looking at file names and maybe we can figure something out.
And the judge said, well, don't do it now, do it later, because we really need to use our time wisely and work on that later.I want to get us back to having witnesses.And so that was the end of that witness.
I imagine we'll probably see more from Mr. Baker soon.I imagine they'll be able to put something together with those clips and whatnot.But yeah, it was, you know,
I mean, can you, like, I guess, like, people at home, lay people might be like, well, that, you know, that seems persnickety and, like, why would they, why would they make them redo that?
Is there, like, can you explain, like, legally why, like, stuff like that is important to, like, narrow down and be certain when it's from?
If you're showing something that, if you're saying, oh, in April this was happening and this video proves it, then it's important that that video actually be from April.
Right.There's no there's no like oopsies in court.It's not like something where it's like, oh, well, you know, actually, that turned out to be from Nova.Like, you have to kind of lock it down.
And what the defense was saying is, well, we didn't get the videos in an organized fashion, so we couldn't do that.But like, I think it's it's just one of those things that I think you'd expect it to be kind of locked down, I guess.
So let's move on to the next witness.
This is Brad Heath, and I want to highlight the beginning of this because the beginning of this contained a moment where I think Brad Rosey got the best response, not only from the jury, but from the whole courtroom that I've seen him get in this trial so far.
So he starts, Brad Heath is the witness, and Brad Rose, he starts asking him some questions about what he does for a living, what he used to do for a living, and he's interrupted because a juror is having a really bad coughing attack, and it just keeps going on and on to the extent that Judge Gold is concerned, and she interrupts testimony.
Rose offers the juror an unopened bottle of water, and then he also says, well, you know, We also have about 20 cops in here who do know the Heimlich.And he says that everybody cracks up.He looks very, very pleased.
That was a good one.You know, he did well there.It was very charming.He was taking care of the jurors.And I thought that was a good win for him, for sure.Absolutely.
And no, we've said he kind of seemed to kind of a rocky start with them in Bois d'Ire, but I think that was a moment that was a bit humanizing and humorous.
We've been critical of him, so I wanted to highlight that.
No, shout out, that was good comedic timing.And, you know, that was, that was, gotta give a hat tip, you know what I mean?Also, so many Brad's in this case.
There were so many Brad's in this case.
Brad Heath is retired.He worked with reliable exterminators, and his job involved driving a regular route.
from Delphi to Logan's Fort, and he's 70 years old now.
Yeah, and this route took him in the general vicinity of the Monon High Bridge on February 13th, 2017.
There was a building there that he had to check some stuff out in, and he's driving through, and he happened to see, parked on the street in a building not far from the Monon High Bridge, not far from the CPS building either, I believe.
on the street.He sees a vehicle parked at 845.He also sees it parked there still in the afternoon.It's parked about two feet off the road.It is an older vehicle.It is dark blue.To him, for some reason, it looked out of place.
He wouldn't expect to see someone park their car like that in the morning and have it still be there in the afternoon.He said later he watched the Harrison Ford film, The Fugitive.Great film.
and the car that Tommy Lee Jones was driving was a good match for this car he saw.
Did he say Bobby Lee Jones by accident or did I mishear that?
I think you misheard that.
OK, I mean, I know I knew it was Tommy Lee Jones, but I thought it for some reason Bobby.But anyway, sorry.Sorry to Mr. Heath.I'm sure it was just me mishearing him.And if you're wondering.Well, what's the relevance of this?
What is the relevance of this?
With Stacey Diener in her cross-examination, she said, well, for clarity, this car you saw was not actually parked at the CPS lot, was it?And he says, that's correct.So basically he saw a car parked on the street.
Just like how Teresa Liebert saw a man near a mailbox.Wow.
And it was parked there for an extended period of time, starting early in the morning, at least as early as 8.45.I often see cars on the street.
I know sometimes I've had my car parked on the street for an extended time if I have like a flat tire or something.
But there's no there's no connection between this and the murder.
And to be clear, when we're when we're criticizing a witness like this, it's not we're not criticizing Mr. Heath.Obviously, he had data.He brought it to the law enforcement as as is proper, given a situation like this.
And he's been helpful and he's he's telling the truth to the jury.And that's None of the witnesses are at fault here.Who's at fault when you have witnesses who are not adding anything?Are the attorneys who are calling them?
Because it's like, what does this add?And I'm going to tell you, he made it very clear when when Diener asked him, did you see Cars in the CPS parking lot.
He said quote there could have been but I wasn't paying attention Quote I can't say there was I can't say there wasn't I didn't see anything because I just wasn't paying attention and quote so he's He's saying that like I brought this car.
That was the thing that stood out to me.Here you go But the other information that could be relevant is I don't have.
I think his testimony would have made an incredible Reddit post in 2019.
Yes.Well, you could say that about maybe most of the witnesses today.And here's the problem.Again, it's not about Mr. Heath.He's he did the right thing.And he's he's being asked and subpoenaed into this.
And so these witnesses are just they tried to help and whatnot.But like, it doesn't matter that he saw a blue car. It just doesn't matter.And it especially doesn't matter since, you know, it wasn't in the relevant place.I don't know.What are they?
I mean, like, like, what is even what?Like, they're just I think it's just to try to confuse the jury at this point.Something like this, because I don't know what else it adds.It certainly doesn't really seem to add anything.
And they didn't really connect it to whatever their theory is supposed to be.
Like there's a car and a person in the morning that day.Wow.Like a car and a person in Delphi, really?Like, I'm just baffled.
At least at this point, it feels like these witnesses are weak and it feels like they're making the defense's case look weak.If this is the best they can do, maybe they would have been better off just resting their case and not presenting anything.
Actually, when we're talking to Susan Hendricks the other day, she's the author of Down the Hill, which is a great book on the Delphi murder.She even kind of threw that out there, like, what if they just rested?
Like, almost like, did the state really prove it?And, you know, that could have been a powerful statement.
I think a powerful statement could have been calling a few expert witnesses to kind of deal with some things like around mental health and maybe the bullet and then resting.Just boom, boom, boom, done.Like, that could have been powerful.
And this adds nothing And it seems like the prosecution is just kind of very, like, again and again, just sort of, like, kind of just swatting this down, like, effortless.Like, Deaner just like, dude, do you see any?
So this wasn't parked at CPS, right?No?Okay.No further questions.No jury questions on this one either.
Yeah.Next witness is presented by Andrew Baldwin.This is David McCain.Very familiar with Milan High Bridge, he says.He works with community projects.He was a project manager for development of the trail.He lives just north of Delphi.
He is 79 years old.Is that correct?Wow.Very healthy looking man for that age.
Yeah.And he I just want to say, like, I mean, with him and with all these witnesses, my heart goes out to them that they've kind of like been dragged into this, like Heath and him and others.But he was, you know, Like it was, it was adorable.
Like he was like talking about like, he just likes to go out and like photograph things and like is into conservation.And I was like, just like, that's a really, that's a really cool thing.So like, just good for him.You know what I mean?
Like, I felt like some of the stuff he was talking about was like, he's into the history of the area.And I'm like, I can definitely relate to that.
So I just, I feel bad that all these people were just kind of going about their day, doing their jobs or having, enjoying a nice time.And they got like sucked into this just awful Meyer situation.Just, you know.
You're talking about the original crime or the trial?
So on February 13, 2017, Mr. McCain was on the trail in the Monon High Bridge that day.He's not sure when exactly he got to the trails.He estimated it was between 2 and 4 p.m.He would usually park at the Mears entrance.
He thinks he's probably got there between 2 and 3.When he parked, he doesn't remember seeing any other cars there.He walked towards the Monon High Bridge. He took some pictures, he went on the Monon High Bridge.
He talked about when you are on the first platform, you are actually over the water and you can see in the water and sometimes you can see rocks.And of course, Baldwin at that point asked, can you see fish?
And the witness said, I don't know about that.What's the reason for that question, Anya?
Alan's story or one of his stories is that he was on the first platform of the bridge watching fish below.And you know, I, this is where I was kind of like, okay, if Baldwin had deposed him and like got him to say, yeah, you can see fish.
I look at fish all the time.Then that would be a nice little zinger to be like, yeah, so you can see fish.It's not crazy.But, It's almost like seeing choreography that kind of like doesn't quite work out because it's like, I don't know.I don't know.
I've never seen fish.It's like, okay, that's less than ideal.
He said he wouldn't have been there if it wasn't such a nice day.He took pictures with a digital camera.Estimates he was on the bridge for less than 30 minutes, walking from the bridge back towards his vehicle.
He saw a couple, a man and a woman, approaching the Monon High Bridge.He vaguely recalls that he might have seen some other people in the distance.He left before 4 p.m.
When he got to his car at the Mears lot, he was surprised by the number of people and vehicles there.At some point, a man asks him or calls out to him, did you see two girls that have gone missing?
He consistently, in response to questions, in response to Baldwin's questions, would say things like, quote, I'm not sure that was seven years ago now, end quote.
He was honest about saying, I don't really remember some of these things, and that some of his recollection is vague.
Also, I want to point out, let's link this back to yesterday's episode, which included Cheyenne Mill, another witness, who described seeing a man with a camera.
Once he finds out what happened, he does let law enforcement know.They come and interview him.They take the SIM card with his photos.
A couple of years later, they come to him and say, it looks like there's a passing car in the back of one of these pictures.Do you recognize it?And he says no.
So again, this is very similar to the Cheyenne testimony in which we have a witness who was there after the crime was committed and noticed nothing relevant to the crime itself.
Can I also just say there was almost a moment where I'm like, this could turn it around for Baldwin.Here we go.When Baldwin asked him, which way did you leave down 300 North?
Because if he's leaving around four, there's the possibility that he could, if he goes a certain way, he could run into Muddy Bloody Man that Sarah Carbaugh saw.Was that what you were thinking at one point?Like, wow, he could be there.
And this is how he responded.Quote, I don't know exactly what I did that day, end quote. I could've gone either way, I didn't see any pedestrians, but I can't even tell you, even when I'm looking at the map, which way I drove that day.
He even was confused about the mention of the CPS building. And again, like some people might call it different things, but it's just, it's just a matter of this, this really did nothing for the defense.
And it frankly made them look desperate in my opinion.I mean, I mean, like, I don't know.
I, I, gosh, I thought there was an interesting moment in, uh, the cross, the cross is by James Luttrell and, uh, this gentleman asked the witness, you know, you did an interview with the FBI.They took notes.
Can I show you those notes to refresh your recollections?And I found it very, very interesting that the defense did not want the witness to see the notes.
And Andy Baldwin says, well, we don't know if the FBI or officer who took these notes actually provided accurate details about what was said. How ironic.
And that is crucial because earlier they're arguing that the FBI agent took accurate notes and details of the Weber interview.So they're all over the place.
Also, the FBI is like the saviors of this case who were booted out by the evil consortium of the ISP and the Carroll County people and all this stuff. So it's like, you know, is the FBI the golden standard here or isn't it?I felt bad.
McCain said the FBI took his SD card years ago and said they were going to give it back and then they never did.So I think they should give that back.That's just an idle thought.But, you know,
I thought Luttrell was very, very respectful and polite, as he has been to all these witnesses.
I note that after this gentleman, Mr. McCain, reviewed the notes from the FBI, some small details of the story changed a bit. He indicated that he now believes he left at 4 and arrived about 3 p.m.
And again, as he was about to leave, he heard a man shouting in his direction.He described it as a large man in an orange jacket who was portly, yelling, have you seen two girls?He feels that he arrived probably maybe even as late as 3.15 p.m.
or maybe it could have been as early as 2.30.He said, I wasn't paying any attention to the time.
And so if he's getting there 3, 3 15, he's too late to see anything by the state's theory, which is that essentially the phone of Liberty German's phone stops moving at 2 32 PM permanently.
And then we can presume that the girls are killed at the very least very shortly after that.And, and the phone ends up underneath Abby's body. And, you know, I mean, that's it.
Now, the defense has contended that the phone stopped moving because it was in a vehicle.So you can imagine that at 232, if it stops moving, then that it's in a vehicle.So by their own.Convoluted theory, it's also gone.
So why are we having all this stuff from people who were there at 3 p.m.when that means nothing?
Yes, they're there after the crime has been committed, whether you believe that crime is murder or kidnapping.And they don't notice anything that is relevant to the solution of the crime.
And they're lovely people.
I'm sure, I mean, it's not their fault.It's nothing against them.It's not their fault.Again, these people all said, hey, here's what happened, here's what I saw.
And that's good data for law enforcement to have, because they're saying, I saw nothing, essentially.Also, the man who kind of was calling for the girls is obviously Derek German, in case you were wondering.That's pretty clear.
But, you know, Baldwin's direct was pretty basic.Well, could you have been longer than an hour, shorter than an hour? He said he doesn't, he thought maybe it was longer than an hour, but he wasn't sure.
And then didn't remember names of the people who interviewed him.Was that it?
And then again, tellingly, electoral, no follow up questions, no jury questions.
You know, but it was just like, again, like they're dragging all these people into it.They add nothing.They don't have any relevant information for either theory.Do you think the goal is to just confuse the jury?
I don't know what the goal is, as I've indicated, the stuff about not knowing the times of the videos, some of this other stuff.It just feels to me like they are not as prepared as they should have been for this trial.
It looks like, I mean, I don't mean to be unkind, but it looks like they went on Reddit in 2019 and just grabbed some posts and said, let's make a case out of it.
These would be like the hottest posts on Delphi Reddit. a few years ago, 2019, people would be salivating, wow, you know, we really heard from David McCain.
And it's like, yeah, but, you know, this is the real world and it has to be relevant to the trial.It was a bad day for the defense.I mean, it doesn't get better from here, folks.
Next witness is Daryl Starrett, and I want to admit my bias.I like this guy.He is a volunteer fire chief, or former volunteer fire chief.
And as you probably don't know, but I don't think I mentioned it, my father is a volunteer fireman and my grandfather actually founded the volunteer fire department in my hometown.
And also a week or so at the trial in the afternoon, you weren't there, I had a lovely conversation with a charming woman who is also a volunteer fireman.So I like volunteer firemen, that's what I'm saying here.
Yes, we love them and we appreciate what they're doing.And so he was, you know, he kind of explained his background, born and raised in Delphi.
And he was 36 years with the fire department, rising to fire chief.He served in that capacity from 2009 up to 2020 or 2021.And he was the fire chief in 2017.And this examination of the fire chief wandered all over the place and really looked,
directionless for a big chunk of it.So on February 13th, 2017, Chief Starrett is reviewing bids for a new fire station starting at 9 a.m.I figured that might take him to three or four.He's back at the station in the evening for training.
They have some sort of CPR training for the firemen so the firemen can learn how to perform CPR in emergency situations. They learn that there's two girls missing, and that the fire department is wanted to go and help with that.
So they go to the sheriff's department, and they start organizing some kind of a search.
COLLEEN O'BRIEN Joint incident command.And then he believes that Tobe Lezenby, the then-sheriff, and Steve Mullen, the Del Valle police chief at the time, are the ones in charge. And, you know, they're just eager to help them.
They believe at this point that, you know, he's not sure what, like, they're getting tips from dispatch and there's possibilities where they're, like, sending out firefighters to look at, like, okay, maybe one of Libby and Abby's friends might know where they are.
They mentioned there was, like, a basketball game in town that night.Like, could they be there?No one's immediately jumping to abduction murder.
And I mean, the level of unnecessary detail, there's a report or a piece of paper that has a list of the people who were at the fire station that night.And Baldwin says, well, how would people get notified of an emergency if they were firemen?
And they said, well, probably over a dispatch, perhaps, but this time that wasn't necessary because they were there for the training exercise. When he went out there to search, where's your park?I mean, this just went on and on.
He said that he thought the girls, the fire chief said at this time in the evening, he thought the girls might be hunkered down somewhere cold and scared and waiting for help.
Yeah, which also is that is important to note because it determined the type of search they were doing.
So when you're looking for like, I know, I mean, I vaguely remember from lifeguarding, if we were like looking in the water for like a body, you're trained to kind of almost like, like link up and kind of almost form a grid and be walking together to see if anyone basically like steps on something and in the water.
And so, but here they're looking for two
living girls who maybe one of them trips and breaks an ankle and then the other one won't leave them and they're like they're huddled up and it's really cold and so they're they're kind of running around yelling you know and it may be a little bit more organized than that but it's like they're yelling their names hey you know like they're expecting someone to be like calling back potentially there were some civilians helping out and then there were some lights used Baldwin spent a lot of time freaking floodlights
He said, oh, were there floodlights?You know, like floodlights like there are at the Hollywood movie premieres.It just went.It was endless.He said people were looking in the water.
Well, I mean, look, there was a lot of like Baldwin kept on trying to tee him up for things. and like that were seemingly in a deposition he did.
And then he'd be like, he wouldn't really quite remember it or we wouldn't remember the thing Baldwin wanted to remember him.So then there was a lot of like checking things and it was a lot of like assigned reading where it's like, turn to this page.
And you know, like, and it was just like, Oh God, this is endless.And the lights were one of those things.
And what he was saying is like, it almost was like Baldwin would be like, Oh, we're people looking in the water with the, with their, with their, um, their lights and he'd be like, well, in my group, I can speak to what was going on.
And he went out with like, I think like maybe five or six other firefighters.But like, he couldn't speak to everyone doing the search.He's just with one group.And he said occasionally they'd be doing that.And then at other times not.
And Baldwin said, oh, did you guys see any clothes in the water?And of course they didn't.
And so I think that is one of the points, I think, I think, I think that that is one of the points Baldwin wanted to make, because their theory is the girls were still alive at this time.
And so if they weren't alive,
And clothes were in the creek.Wouldn't they have noticed that with their flashlights?I think that's what he was trying to say.
What's your thought about that argument, given that it was very dark out?I mean, at this time, we're talking it's after 9 p.m., right?
It's very dark.It's after 9 p.m.They were there until I think 2.30 a.m.I don't know what time they were looking into the water.It's dark under there, even with lights.
If the clothing was then where it was found, it was tangled up on rocks and stuff, I think underneath the bridge. even in daytime it was difficult for the searchers to find, so I don't really think it means anything.
I don't know if it was directly under the bridge, but I completely agree with you. It's not a good point.
And I think he also wanted, he was trying to get the fire chief to say that he searched the area where the bodies were later found and did not see the bodies, which would support his theory.
But the fire chief made it pretty clear that he did not search the area where the bodies were found that night. And that the priority was to, they feared that something had happened to the girl, they'd been swept downstream.
So that's where they were looking and they were not looking in the area where they were ultimately found to have been horribly murdered.So this, how long do you think this direct examination went on?It felt like a very long time.
a year.I mean, he talked about how, like, he and the other people in his kind of group were very far apart.Like, one guy might be 10 feet ahead of him walking through brush, you know.
And it just, like, even if they were, like, for all these searchers, imagine this.You're in this situation.Your flashlight or your lantern is lighting a little bit ahead of you, and you can see things to a certain extent, but you're in brush.
It's very cold out.There's a bunch of other people running around.They're calling for the girls.
You know, this is not exactly given how dark it is conducive to finding the bodies or finding clues like the clothing it and I can see People missing that even if they get close or even if they're kind of in the right area I mean we heard from previous testimony from searchers that people were
you know, deputies were coming up to the bodies and missing them because they were in a shallow depression.And that's in daylight.And they were having to be told, hey, look over there.And then they see them.
So it's like whatever point they're trying to make when like, I just don't think that's common sense.
like saying like if you have like evidence documenting that the the firefighters were in the shallow depression at 7 a.m when it's light out and then they went somewhere else and they came back and the bodies were there bingo you've got a really good point to make here but like i don't think we were over there it was very dark and we were all searching for either
possible accidental fall drowning situation victims or kids who got lost or hurt and are alive.It just doesn't appeal to my it doesn't appeal to like rationality or anything.
And again, doesn't really address the central issue of whether or not Richard Allen was the man on the bridge.I have in my notes, Nick McLean had no questions.
Again, that's like kind of a diss, right?I mean, like, cross-examination is like an opportunity to clean something up.You know, it's like, OK, let me clean this up and kind of get my points in for the jury.
When you're basically not doing that, you're saying what you've put out there isn't even worth responding to.And no one buys it.
Juror questions, as Anya mentioned, at many points during this long direct examination, he would ask the question and he would not get the answer he expected.
And so he would say to Chief, former Chief Starrett, I'm going to show you a page of the deposition to reflect, to refresh your recollection. And so a juror said, well, how long ago was this deposition given?And was the chief given a copy?
And the deposition was given just three to four weeks ago, and the chief got a copy about two weeks later.And the other question was, did you search the area southeast of the cemetery?And the answer was no.
Yeah, I This was and again, I don't I don't blame the witnesses.I think they're they're trying their best here.But I think like they just keep on getting asked these repetitive questions in order to get them to a very specific response.
And it's not being done very artfully at this point.No.Now, now, where were we?
Okay, Steve Mullen's back.
We call prosecution investigator, former Delphi police chief Steve Mullen to the stand.And Andrew Baldwin immediately signals where he's going to go by saying, how important is it to preserve evidence?Mullen says, very important.
And this is because he wants to bring up the fact that some interviews that were conducted early on within the Delphi Police Department of people who may be involved in the case, those interviews were accidentally recorded over.
No, I feel like part of this was to bring up Brad Holder.That was one of the interviews that was taped over.
That was a really big deal to the defense because he was part of the gang they alleged of alleged odinous who they claim were the real perpetrators of this.
And I felt like they kind of have tried to like bring that back in by trying to sneak it in, kind of trick people into opening the door of like, yeah.
Yeah, it was a funny moment because Andrew Baldwin early on in this said to Mullen, what evidence, if any, is missing in this case?And Nick McClellan says, do you mean the evidence?
You mean the case of the evidence against Richard Allen and the charges against him? And Baldwin says, I mean, the whole case of Abbey and Libby.And McClellan said it was only relevant if it pertains to the case against Richard Allen.
And that is McClellan saying the Odinism stuff doesn't pertain to the case against Richard Allen.So it's not relevant to be discussed here at all.
Yeah.There was quickly a sidebar, as one can imagine. Maybe we'll talk about it in a minute, but I do want to address some of the very strange behavior we saw in this from Baldwin.
Well, you know what?Why not? Okay.This cross-examination started well for Baldwin, in my opinion, because he was kind of... No, not cross-examination.No, direct examination.
This direct examination started well for Baldwin, in my mind, because he was really hitting Mullenhard about, like, you made these mistakes.
And, like, anytime you're able to make law enforcement look bad in front of the jury, that's good for the defense, right?Regardless of, like, how important it is to the case against Richard Allen.
If you're saying, you lost interviews, the jury might be like, well, okay, that doesn't sound good.So, like, that's all great. for Baldwin. But as things gone on, it's like he was taking a longer time to ask questions.There were a lot of pauses.
There was one time where he's digging around in notes.
He kept looking up at the clock.
It was like if you told me he was trying to drag things out because they were like about to run out of witnesses for that day because they had been thrown off by the fact that Max Baker's video wasn't coming in for the time being, I would not be surprised.
But I also be confused because I'd be like, well, why not just say Let's be done early today or something.Like I didn't get it.It was really weird.
And also a lot of the stuff he went over with Mullen went from that kind of hard hitting stuff to like being really redundant to things that had already been discussed and like gone over it.And like what he was doing wasn't adding anything.
Like I just and actually I was surprised that McClellan didn't object more here. Like, he got pretty quiet.
And then Baldwin's kind of going through this as well, you know, like literally just, we'll go over some of the examples, but it was just thing after thing of, of, of, of just, you know, they went over again, they went over the interviews and I thought that was a good start for Baldwin.
You mean the missing interviews?
The missing interviews where they, they, they taped over the interviews and then they got some of them back, but they didn't come back with audio.So not good.That makes the, the county authorities, look like they are not on the ball.
And given all the technical issues, we've had a trial.It might be a sort of an uncomfortable reminder for the jury.
Yeah, so that they went over that and then he was criticizing Mullen for like drafting reports at the time, documenting the fact that they lost these things, but not dating, but not dating them.And these
You know, Mullen says, I'm sorry I didn't add the date.
So Mullen says that he called Brad Weber in August of 2024 to arrange for Brad Weber to come to the police station. for a conversation.
That conversation would be about whether or not Brad Weber was driving the van on February 13th as we discussed earlier.And Baldwin was very upset and indignant because Steve Mullen
The interview they had with Brad Weber when he came to the police station, that was fully recorded, but Steve Mullen did not record it when he called Brad Weber to ask him to come to the police station.
And so Baldwin tried to suggest that in that unrecorded call, Steve Mullen, for all we know, might have been telling Brad Weber exactly what to say.So it should have been recorded.Why didn't you record it?There's a recorder on your phone.
Why didn't you use that?And Mullen said, well, I can't use the recorder on my phone because I was using my phone to actually call Brad Weber.And Baldwin was like, well,
You have a CVS in town, they sell tape recorders, you should have tape recorded the call.
I mean, like, do they normally tape a call?Like, calls that are just, hey, come into the station now?I thought it was somewhat interesting that he was basically accusing of being corrupt and framing Richard Allen here.
And I was a little bit surprised that McClellan did not object to that.
I don't know.I mean, it didn't really seem reasonable to me.I mean, I think we've been pretty upfront that we felt like there were issues with this investigation.And I don't think it's a good look that they lost all those interviews.
But like, there's another thing of like saying, like, you planted things in Brad Weber's head to do that.It just felt a little bit, I don't know.I mean, that's just my opinion.Obviously, they're going to be aggressive.
But I mean, I just I was, again, a little bit surprised McClellan did not step in there.
He asked Mullen if there was a list of law enforcement personnel who were walking in the area where the bullet was found, clearly trying to implicitly suggest that it was actually a police officer's bullet.
And there's always been a lot of things where like this is a sprawling investigation and people like Steve Mullen, Jerry Holman, Tony Liggett, they have all functioned in different roles doing different things at different times.
And so sometimes you'll have a situation where like maybe it's something Holman focused on and not Mullen. And then if you ask Mullen about it, then it's a chance for Baldwin to make him look like a doofus who doesn't know what's going on.
Like, you don't know that?You never measured the bridge?Stuff like that when it's like, well, that was someone else doing it.So that's a big theme in a lot of these. Let's see.Baldwin acknowledged it's a quite, quote, pretty big deal.
You're making a big deal about this white van, kind of acknowledging that that is an important part of the state's case.They talked about whether or not this is a big thing, like whether or not one person could have killed Libby and Abby.
Mullen said that since the arrest of Richard Allen, that is what he believes.You know, when asked if in the past, he says, quote, it doesn't matter what I think. It matters, essentially, what the evidence is.
Baldwin wanted to know, when did law enforcement find out that Dr. Walla listened to podcasts?Mullen didn't know.Was there an Amber Alert for Abby and Libby?Mullen doesn't remember.Is that kind of like jumping around?
It's jumping around, but it's also like, who cares?At one point, And if they had any wider point to some of those things, it was lost.
One point that Mullen got in a good counterpunch when he said, you know, they're talking about the bridge and how important is it that Betsy Blair saw Richard Allen on the bridge?
And he indicated it's not that important because, quote, Mr. Allen says himself that he was out on the bridge.And then Baldwin's like, like, like outraged and like, where are you getting that?Where are you?
You know, like, and he's like, he puts himself there at one thirty. We see something that looks exactly like his car on the Hoosier Harvester video at 127.
And then Baldwin's countering like, well, he also said he was there from noon to 130 and you don't care about that.And then he's like, well, from his original report, he said.
the later time, and then Baldwin saying, look, were you standing next to Dan Doolin?So it was very heated, but in a way that didn't seem like super effective.
Baldwin wanted to know how many tips linked Richard Allen to the crime.Mullen said just one, you know, the one that Richard Allen turned in himself.Baldwin wanted to know approximately how many searchers were there on February 13th.
Mullen didn't know. Baldwin wanted to know who would know the most about the data on Liberty German's phone.
What kind of question is that?They've called a tech guy.
Christopher Cecil.And Baldwin said, well, did any tipsters claim to recognize Bridge Guy's voice?And Mullen said, yes.
I just felt like at some point like Baldwin was going to be like play me out Rosie and like didn't like like kind of like dance out of the thing he was like stalling for time like you expected almost someone to like burst through the door suddenly be like I'm the real witness and like they're like oh thank goodness you got here we had a delay for a while like it I mean it was it was like he was vamping.
And then in the end, I think his final question was, well, so before Richard Allen was arrested and put into solitary, did he ever confess?And Mullen said, uh, no.
I just, but like, okay, you're a lawyer.Why would you do this?Why would you do any of this? It really didn't feel like he even, when he was up there, it didn't feel like Baldwin even cared about it.
Like, beyond some of the answers that we got to, it felt like a lot of it was just like he was just throwing out stuff.Like, why would you do that?
Did it look like he was stalling for time for you?
It looked like, I think I was the one that first pointed out to you how often he was looking at the clock.
You did.And then other people started noticing it too.And I started noticing it.And then I noticed how he would pause and Ask questions in a slower manner.I mean, it was like, it was like, what are we doing?
Wasting the court's time.That's what it felt like.
A cross-examination for Prosecutor Nick McLean established that the phone call that Stephen Mullen made to Brad Weber was a very basic call just asking him to come down to the station and did not tell him the subject or tell him what he had to say.
And that interview was recorded.
I thought it was bizarre.Well, maybe it was a redirect where he mentioned the text.
Yeah, we can get to that.And apparently at some point, Brad Weber's gun was collected by law enforcement.It was tested and returned to him.
Andrew Baldwin, said, did you ask Brad Weber if he ever gave inconsistent statements about driving home?This is during the redirect.
And Mullen said that Brad Weber said he remembered exactly what happened the day, that day, because he has subsequently reviewed his text messages from that day that are on his phone.
And Baldwin also tried to suggest that the lab report on Bradley Weber's gun did not specifically exclude it from being connected to the bullet.
But then on recross, Prosecutor McLean says that the gun technician said that the bullet at the scene had been cycled through Richard Allen's gun, and they did not come to that conclusion about Brad Weber's gun.
And then didn't at one point Baldwin ask something about like, like almost isn't it odd that Brad Webber would look at those texts of his day if he didn't know what was going on?
But meanwhile, like a lot of people who come up on the stand of the defense is called have talked about like, oh, well, I remember this because of phone call.I remember this because I look back and I saw what time the phone call.So again, when when
When it works for them, it's fine.But when someone else does it, especially someone, you know, Odin isms out, folks.So obviously you got to pin it all on Brad Webber.Like, that's the that's the goal now.
So now everything he does is incredibly suspicious, even though it wouldn't be if it was anyone else.Right.
Right.Should we move on to Tobe Lezenby, the next witness?Yes. Let's do it.Tobe Lezenby, he was only on the stand, I think about maybe 10.
Oh, can I just actually say there were a lot of questions because I want the trail cam.We got to mention the trail cam.
Oh, talk about the trail cam.
Mullen at some point brings up a trail cam.They got to look at the trail cam.The jury was obsessed with the friggin trail cam.And they went over where the trail cam was facing.It was facing sort of west, slightly south towards Delphi.
You could not see the crime scene with the bodies from there.It was actually kind of in the different direction.They saw someone on the trail cam on maybe the 13th and also maybe the 14th and firemen looking for the girls.
Everyone wanted to know about the trail cam.There was, you know,
like what can you see in the trail cam you can kind of see the ground the trees the sky um could you see the bodies no could uh you know basically do you think that the girls how do you think the phone got under what was there something about like do you think they died around 232 essentially because
And then at one point, Mullen kind of, I think, goofed up because he misunderstood a question.
He like they were asking, like, do you think that somebody who's driving and sees a parked car would really give that much of a good identification as a trained investigator?And I think he thought they were asking if he would do a good job.
So he was like, yes, I think what they're asking is, would like a civilian do a good job?And then someone else asked a similar question where he was like, well, some people would be really good at identifying a car and then others not so much.
The questions here seemed devastating to Baldwin.These were questions that were not following whatever logic he was putting down or whatever he was doing.These guys wanted to know about more concrete things.
I would be worried if I heard those questions and I was on the defense. And they were also looking for outs of like, well, can't people, can't eyewitnesses get stuff wrong sometimes?
Like those questions must have made McClellan pretty happy and the defense team pretty sad.
Final witness of the day, former sheriff Tobe Lezenby, now the chief deputy of Carroll County.He acknowledged that he did not play a huge role in the investigation.He said his role as sheriff had him primarily doing administrative stuff.
And that may be a surprise to some folks who follow the case for a long time, because Lesenby has always been in the media and has been kind of a public face of the case at times.But one must remember, he is the sheriff of the county.
He needs to project that.I think I mean, I think a lot of sheriffs in that position would want to, like, show, hey, we care about this and we're talking about it.I'm going to talk to the media about it.
But that does not mean he is doing day to day work. And in fact, he cannot because it is largely an administrative role.He's he's running the sheriff's office.
People like Tony Liggett, who was a detective who is working on the case, they are going to be a lot more hands on and be more knowledgeable as a result.So not surprising there.
So with that said, Baldwin asked him, how many people do you think are involved in the murders?And Toblezenby said, well, after the arrest, ever since, I thought there was just one person involved.
And then Baldwin had him refresh his recollection by looking at a deposition Lezenby gave in August of 2020, in August of 23, in which Lezenby said that he thought that there were at least two people involved.
And of course, this was about 10 months after Richard Allen's arrest. So he now acknowledges that, yes, at that time, apparently he did think there were two people involved.
And then the next question was, are there other people who thought that more than one person was involved?And he had to check the deposition again.
And McLuhan did foundational questions, too.
And he acknowledged that at least at some point, Tony Liggett, now the sheriff, thought that there was more than one person.
Or that he thought Tony Liggett thought.
And McLuhan got him to say, did you know cross-examination?
Well, no, even foundational.Do you know the thoughts of other officers on this?And it was kind of like, well, early on in 2017, I thought I did.
And on the cross-examination, he got, he made the point that Tobe Lezenby was not involved in the investigation and didn't know all the details.
This information about Tobe Lezenby I think came out originally to the public back at the Franks memorandum over a year ago now.
And I've never really understood what the big deal is because when people are investigating, it's good to keep your mind open to all possibilities and go where the evidence leads you.
And I think it would be a very poor investigator indeed who would set his mind on one possibility and then just discard everything that doesn't fit it.
Well, that's what the defense does.
So I would think that the idea of a person thinking something and then getting evidence and then saying, well, no, now I think this.So I don't understand what the big deal is.
It there is no big deal.It's just about like picking out things and spinning them at this point and it's what's that Mark Bowden books that The Last Stone.
The Last Stone.That is an account of murder of two girls.Murder of two girls and three or four police officers who work together and ultimately get a conviction in the case.
And what is striking is at the end of the book, it's revealed that each of those investigators have slightly different versions of what they think happened. that they disagree.Investigators are human beings.
They have different perspectives on what happened.And ultimately, what matters is what you can prove in court.
Yeah, what fits the charges and that like this trial isn't going to prove anything.It's not going to like fix everything and make everyone's answers go away for every single topic.
And frankly, there's a lot of minutiae in the case that doesn't matter.It might be interesting to learn about, but it doesn't matter legally speaking.But dragging out Tove Lesenby here, it just was like, it was like, he's allowed to have his opinion.
And also he was you know, he was like, he was working as an administrator.Like, if I had been working on an article at Insider back at my old job, you know, and like, if you ask my editor, like, oh, what did you think about Anya's findings?
And like, they might not know everything about it, or they might remember when I started it and I had one, you know, thesis or conclusion, and then maybe that evolved into something else later that they wouldn't write.
It just felt like, you know, this is, this was a waste of time today. This was a complete waste of time.
One juror question.How many murders have you personally investigated?And Lesme acknowledged that he has not personally investigated any murders.
So, you know, OK.And it's like. I mean.It was.Why?Like why?Like just put on your bullet expert and I'm sure they have some sort of crime scene person.Just put on that and rest if you don't have anything.Don't be putting on jurors that are not jurors.
Witnesses that are frankly just not adding anything to your theory of the case at all.Not taking away from the state's case either.
Yeah.Lesson B, again, is another witness who doesn't go to the issue of whether or not it was Richard Allen on that bridge.
No, they seem to desperately want to, like, do, you know, the dangling shiny keys every time Richard Allen comes up.Don't look over it.Don't look over the guy staring at everyone.
Like, just focus on all this other stuff that has nothing to do with anything and doesn't even bolster our theory of the crime.It's just
it's been it's been disillusioning to watch this because again like we expected well for for a while ago we expected a very good defense and and even even as we've gotten closer and closer and we've seen some of the behaviors on the side of the defense we were sort of like well i mean they must be ready to go to trial because they didn't continue it and like here we go and they must have kind of gotten something other than odinism to put together and it's just like here we are and we're like you know
top 10 Reddit posts on Delphi from 2019, you know, who got the most upvotes.And here we go.And it's like, where are they getting their strategy from?What is happening?
So that was the last witness of the day.And the jury was dismissed.But Judge Gold had a couple more things to handle the defense.So
All the way back at the beginning of the episode, we talked about this witness, Gauthier, who worked on a report with Special Agent Pohl of the FBI.
They hoped to get Gauthier to talk about it today, and that didn't work out well for them, so now they want to bring in Special Agent Pohl.
But he's working on election security in Texas and also has some health issues which prevent him from traveling.
He's actually the supervisory special agent.
So they wanted him to testify via Zoom and they said, you know, we had this, we just got this discovery in August and so blah, blah, blah. And Goel says, oh, so you got this evidence about Weber in August, and when did you issue the subpoena to Pohl?
And it turns out they didn't issue the subpoena for Pohl until early October.And I think that went a long way towards Goel's decision to deny.
You could sort of hear their hopes sink when she asked that question.
And then the other big issue is they have, since the trial began, they have filed twice to bring Odinism back.
Well, Jesse James, remember that?That was first.
They've been talking about bringing in people who were incarcerated to testify.And Brad Rose, at this point, indicates that the one they're most concerned about is an inmate named Jesse James.
And they they don't know when they want him, but they might want him.And don't basically he said, don't worry about any of the other incarcerated people for now.But like, we'll let you know.It was that kind of what you got from it.
But one thing with Paul is the defense will be able to confront Weber when they call him because they've subpoenaed him.So it's not like they can't go over possible discrepancies with him.But they like basically goals like confront him about it.
They didn't impeach him properly when McClellan brought him out.It was like, go after him yourselves.Don't worry.You can use the statement to do that, but you don't need to call Poland, basically.Is that kind of it?
And then Odinism.They filed twice since the trial began to bring Odinism back.And Judge Gulligan said there has to be a nexus, and there is none.So that was denied.
I think they've acted like their whole strategy was Odinism, and that after Odinism was removed from their grasp from Judge Gull, I believe they still had hopes that she would change her mind and bring it back.
I don't know, but it doesn't look like they came up with anything as an alternative, which is why we've gotten some of the witnesses we've gotten, in my opinion.
How on earth would you ever think that Odinism would?
It seems like they they tried to accuse Holman and I think McClelland himself of opening the door on Odinism by mentioning, you know, things like undoing in terms of putting the sticks on and like, oh, the sticks.
And could more than one person have done this?Like Jerry Holman mentioned
I think that typically when you have a group of people who do a crime and one of them gets in trouble, they might squeal on the others and they're like, that's what Elvis Fields did.And it's like.
That that's like a. I mean, that's delusional if they thought that that was going to just come back in, I mean.
After the three-day hearing, I would think there would be a team who would be, let's reassess, let's look at what is going to be the most promising defense to present for a jury.And at that point, it should have been clear that Odinism wasn't it.
And then there was another long sidebar.And when they came back, Judge Gohl indicated that tomorrow it looks like there's going to be one witness and possibly video.So that's where things stand.
So it sounds like they're going to bring back Max Baker and maybe we're going to watch some of the video.So I don't know.I mean, I don't want to maybe that or maybe something else entirely.Who knows?But it was a disappointing day.I don't.
I don't feel like a lot of this added anything and I I can't I mean I can't imagine more and more weeks of this because it's just they've had they've had a while to kind of right the ship here and why they would bring in this parade of witnesses that are not adding anything and are not
not even really like, not even really causing confusion in a very effective way.Because I think most people are just looking at it and like, that we've talked to and was like, wait, what, like that person was there at three, then who cares?
Yeah, it's all, it's all a mystery to me.
I had to do it.So have a good day or a good night and we'll probably be doing another one of these tomorrow to tell you about whatever happens then.
Thanks everyone, bye bye.
Thanks so much for listening to the Murder Sheet.If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email us at murdersheet at gmail dot com.
If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.
If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet.If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet.
We very much appreciate any support.
Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for the murder sheet, and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com.
If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet Discussion Group on Facebook.We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much.
We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages.Thanks again for listening. Thanks so much for sticking around to the end of this Murder Sheet episode.
Just as a quick post-roll ad, we wanted to tell you again about our friend Jason Blair's wonderful Silver Linings Handbook.This show is phenomenal.
Whether you are interested in true crime, the criminal justice system, law, mental health, stories of marginalized people, overcoming tragedy, well-being, like, he does it all.This is a show for you.
He has so many different conversations with interesting people, people whose loved ones have gone missing, other podcasters in the true crime space, just interesting people with interesting life experiences.And
Jason's gift, I think, is just being an incredibly empathetic and compassionate interviewer, where he's really letting his guests tell their stories and asking really interesting questions along the way, guiding those conversations forward.
I would liken it to like you're kind of almost sitting down with friends and sort of just hearing these fascinating tales that you wouldn't get otherwise, because he just has that ability as an interviewer to tease it out and really make it interesting for his audience.
On a personal level, Jason is frankly a great guy.He's been a really good friend to us.And so it's fun to be able to hit a button on my phone and get a little dose of Jason talking to people whenever I want.It's a really terrific show.
We really recommend it highly.
Yeah, I think our audience will like it.And you've already met Jason if you listen consistently to our show.He's been on our show a couple times.We've been on his show.He's a terrific guest.
I say this in one of our ads about him, but I literally always am like, oh yeah, I remember when Jason said this.That really resonated.I do quote him in conversations sometimes because he really has a good grasp of different
She quotes him to me all the time.
I do.I'm like, remember when Jason said this?That was so right.So, I mean, I think if we're doing that, I think, and you like us, I think you should give it a shot.Give it a try.I think you'll really enjoy it.
And again, he does a range of different topics, but they all kind of have the similar theme of compassion, of overcoming suffering, of dealing with suffering, of mental health, wellness, things like that.
There's kind of a common through line of compassion and empathy there that I think we find very nice. We work on a lot of stories that can be very tough and we try to bring compassion and empathy to it.
But this is something that almost can be like if you're kind of feeling a little burned out by true crime, I think this is kind of the life affirming stuff that can be nice to listen to in a podcast.
It's compassionate, it's affirming, but I also want to emphasize it's smart.Jason is a very intelligent, articulate person.This is a smart show, but it's an accessible show.I think you'll all really enjoy it.
Yeah, and he's got a great community that he's building.So we're really excited to be a part of that.We're fans of the show.We love it.And we would strongly encourage you all to check it out.Download some episodes, listen.
I think you'll understand what we're talking about once you do.But anyways, you can listen to The Silver Linings Handbook wherever you listen to podcasts.
Wherever you listen to podcasts.Very easy to find.Absolutely.
